netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] [RFC] Add c/r support for connected INET sockets

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:22:26 -0700
From:	Dan Smith <danms@...ibm.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	containers@...ts.osdl.org, John Dykstra <jdykstra72@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [RFC] Add c/r support for connected INET sockets

>> +	CKPT_COPY(op, hh->daddr, sk->daddr);
>> +	CKPT_COPY(op, hh->rcv_saddr, sk->rcv_saddr);
>> +	CKPT_COPY(op, hh->dport, sk->dport);
>> +	CKPT_COPY(op, hh->num, sk->num);
>> +	CKPT_COPY(op, hh->saddr, sk->saddr);
>> +	CKPT_COPY(op, hh->sport, sk->sport);

SH> This becomes an easy way around CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE right?  Or
SH> will that be caught by something already done in your listen patch
SH> after this step?

Actually, yeah, you're right.  I was going to say that we'd catch it
because we also do a bind(), but there's no guarantee that the
sockaddr_in we use for bind() is the same as this :D

-- 
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
email: danms@...ibm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html