10.03.2021 14:43, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Document that security reports must not use the 'null-co' block
> driver, as it leaves memory uninitialized on purposed (this is
> a performance feature).
> Reports must be send using the 'zeroes-co' driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> ---
> docs/devel/secure-coding-practices.rst | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/docs/devel/secure-coding-practices.rst b/docs/devel/secure-coding-practices.rst
> index cbfc8af67e6..64d61085804 100644
> --- a/docs/devel/secure-coding-practices.rst
> +++ b/docs/devel/secure-coding-practices.rst
> @@ -104,3 +104,10 @@ structures and only process the local copy. This prevents
> time-of-check-to-time-of-use (TOCTOU) race conditions that could cause QEMU to
> crash when a vCPU thread modifies guest RAM while device emulation is
> processing it.
> +
> +Use of null-co / zeroes-co block drivers
> +----------------------------------------
> +
> +When reporting security issues, the null-co block driver must not be used,
> +as it is designed for performance and its read accesses are not initialized.
> +The zeroes-co block driver must be used instead.
>
How much it differs from just document that when reporting security issues the null-co block driver must be used with read-zeroes=true?
--
Best regards,
Vladimir