netdev - Re: Bug with IPv6-UDP address binding

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:	Thu, 09 Aug 2012 13:37:50 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: Bug with IPv6-UDP address binding

On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 11:40 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:

> Yes, I guess its an application bug, because Berkely-derived
> implementations don't handle multihomeing well for UDP.
> 
> Why are we keeping this, counter-intuitive behavior? 
> 

Because the BSD api has no other choice.

> What about changing the implementation to act like Solaris, which IMHO
> makes much more sense?
> 
> (BTW, iperf also have this "bug")
> 

Please describe how connect() is able to correctly chose for you a
source address, if you have say 256 addresses.

connect() API only requires the destination.

If you want a precise source, you must use bind() before the connect()

Any UDP application wanting to correctly reflect "correct source IP"
must say so to the kernel.

I dont think kernel could magically help here, really.

--
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