netdev - Re: [PATCH 5/5] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through Xtables too

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 7 Apr 2010 15:26:21 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
cc:	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through
 Xtables too


On Tuesday 2010-04-06 18:37, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Thursday 2010-04-01 15:22, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>> Or should we be using skb_alloc and copying the data portion over, like 
>>>> ipt_REJECT does since v2.6.24-2931-g9ba99b0?
>>> I guess pskb_copy() would be most optimal since we can modify
>>> the header, but the non-linear area could be shared
>> 
>> Trying to improve my understanding: when doing skb_pull,
>> does the skb->head that is relevant for pskb_copy move?
>
>skb_pull() only changes skb->data.

But how does it interact, with, say, xt_TCPMSS which modifies not
only the L3 header, but also the L4 header?
--
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