From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827BFC433E0 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 20:56:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5117C206F6 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 20:56:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="byd/f9TO" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729119AbgGGU4d (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:56:33 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56328 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726273AbgGGU4d (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:56:33 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x441.google.com (mail-pf1-x441.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::441]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 629A8C061755 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 13:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x441.google.com with SMTP id x72so9512125pfc.6 for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 13:56:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=w+KZo1sPWTutiATsxk3Uy2pZjCjintgvyK96Yf9RfKc=; b=byd/f9TOVQc3JmoxGzurellv8qYNwshDPxpudLMSpoQM9PXIdnFsKaJ9zv8+LjHkWt Leo4c50JOA4qXA0q3+rtKY0nYEcZ9d1mYgf/2BrCcZp2+Uw1v+MgX5geDMjo26ahQ/Xq WG2e0WGcuRqGJCLCZE9qF8ctnON5a8fs64ZRk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=w+KZo1sPWTutiATsxk3Uy2pZjCjintgvyK96Yf9RfKc=; b=roqKXJhekDDjLrl5VDiPnu8PvxvM7KlEBmIz9q/ecEXyYATMcpN/P7XkoxwfVMobmr ZwUVLaPeVRQ2RKz8xhxDbNEDjYHbnsPWn2yo5P02bD/XPAMpbkp8V0To8pMIAs8ftEkU mZvxkEN4ecZXzM7e7UmqVWlCsIMXoT4EeYAfZQ1JzDkHL2LLI9nk02SQaR0vve6GDSwB 6oYDQZ9pNRgDzrPeuIgMCutsBAWz55ij8YfWNgALV2JKq7UB0vFNNuWVU8GI6/jrkB5C myIN8G9GNr8+0cFrLxAGo7GnHOIOIGyRUPnn/1v/oq7Nge17qzXUiDS7vJudH1Fg76cB qIUg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53270MQ6S+YiKjrRiHDqXmT1Antv1UOu2ICz5uf/MstdPV3tA1st I9NQi0CniscqMlvAJsth/TnQoA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxVvLhi5KAqgk+fO2zPVpbTI4B38DeQ3QOZndyWiKG1akDQwEeglJUxopKEbgdAvRuSbH353g== X-Received: by 2002:a62:ce46:: with SMTP id y67mr47587752pfg.118.1594155392908; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 13:56:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k100sm3315034pjb.57.2020.07.07.13.56.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 07 Jul 2020 13:56:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 13:56:30 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Steven Rostedt , ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML , "tech-board-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Chris Mason Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [Tech-board-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology Message-ID: <202007071346.F123B0A57@keescook> References: <159389297140.2210796.13590142254668787525.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <202007062234.A90F922DF@keescook> <202007070137.3ADBEDC@keescook> <20200707094147.213e0a82@oasis.local.home> <20200707144542.GD9411@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200707144542.GD9411@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 05:45:42PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 09:41:47AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 01:54:23 -0700 > > Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > "I will whitelist the syscall" -- sounds correct to me (same for > > > "it is whitelisted" or "it is in whitelisting mode"). > > > > > > "I will allow-list the syscall" -- sounds wrong to me (same for > > > "it is allow-listed" or "it is in allow-listing mode"). > > > > That's because we can't just make "allow-list" a drop in replacement > > for "whitelist" as I too (native English speaker) find it awkward. But > > then we don't need to make it a drop in replacement. > > > > "I will whitelist the syscall" will become "I will add the syscall to > > the allow-list", which sounds perfectly fine, and even better than > > saying "I will add the syscall to the whitelist". > > I will allow the syscall? Kind of, but it's this change to verb-noun from adj-noun that confuses the resulting language: the verb form of the verb-noun doesn't distinguish between its stand-alone action ("allowed") or its combined action ("allow-list-ed") in the same way that the verb form of the adj-noun does (the verbed adj-noun is its own word). To me to looks like "allowed" and "whitelisted" mean distinct things (as in, a single allowance vs being added to the persistent list of allowances). So "I will allow this system call once" and "I will allow all instances of this syscall", or we just get used to using the verb-noun as a whole, and embrace "I allowlisted the syscall." But yes, as I and others come back to: it's fine. We'll just use different surrounding constructs to avoid confusion. But it is an odd characteristic of English's grammar (or lack of appropriately descriptive adjectives) to not have a drop-in replacement. (Which is where I think the master/slave replacements fair far better -- the whitelist replacement is more complex, but it's mostly just English glitchiness.) -- Kees Cook