netdev - Re: Add a SOCK_DESTROY operation to close sockets from userspace

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, 18 Nov 2015 23:45:46 +0900
From:	Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Erik Kline <ek@...gle.com>,
	Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Add a SOCK_DESTROY operation to close sockets from userspace

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
<hannes@...essinduktion.org> wrote:
> I was not saying using tcp_close literally, sorry for not making that
> clear, but just model the state transitions after tcp_close. At least it
> seems like a normal close to me.

But it shouldn't be a normal close. Consider calling SOCK_DESTROY on a
socket that is streaming data to a peer. If SOCK_DESTROY results in
the kernel sending a FIN, the remote side might think that the sender
closed the connection gracefully, even though the local side aborted
the connection.
--
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