netdev - Re: Increasing skb->mark size

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:	Sun, 29 Nov 2015 20:58:54 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	lorenzo@...gle.com
Cc:	Matt.Bennett@...iedtelesis.co.nz, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Luuk.Paulussen@...iedtelesis.co.nz
Subject: Re: Increasing skb->mark size

From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 17:37:11 +0900

> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Matt Bennett
> <Matt.Bennett@...iedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
>> I'm emailing this list for feedback on the feasibility of increasing
>> skb->mark or adding a new field for marking. Perhaps this extension
>> could be done under a new CONFIG option.
> 
> 64-bit marks (both skb->mark and sk->sk_mark) would be useful for
> hosts doing complex policy routing as well. Current Android releases
> use 20 of the 32 bits. If the mark were 64 bits, we could put the UID
> in it, and stop using ip rules to implement per-UID routing.

If you guys, really anyone, can find a way to remove some other
32-bit item from sk_buff, you can expand skb->mark to 64-bits.

But otherwise, I'm going to be strongly against it.

sk_buff is already enormous and larger than it should be.  So
I'm going to resist any change that makes it even larger.

Thanks.
--
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