netdev - Re: Missing INET6_PROTO_FINAL in l2tp_ip6

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:	Mon, 23 May 2016 14:25:21 +0300
From:	Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Missing INET6_PROTO_FINAL in l2tp_ip6_protocol?

Hi,

On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:05:50 +0200, hannes@...essinduktion.org wrote:
> > However, one more thing WRT to INET6_PROTO_FINAL not being set - we're
> > also missing the multicast filtering of 'ip6_input_finish':
> > 
> > 			if (ipv6_addr_is_multicast(&hdr->daddr) &&
> > 			    !ipv6_chk_mcast_addr(skb->dev, &hdr->daddr,
> > 			    &hdr->saddr) &&
> > 			    !ipv6_is_mld(skb, nexthdr, skb_network_header_len(skb)))
> > 				goto discard;
> > 
> > I assume no reason to allow multicast daddr which aren't in the mc_list
> > (or saddr excluded) to pass up into 'l2tp_ip6_recv'?
> > 
> 
> Good point, seems we would benefit of the addition of the PROTO_FINAL
> flag. Could you test and send a patch?

Will do.

Regards,
Shmulik