netdev - Re: Use sock_diag instead of procfs for new address families?

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:   Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     stefanha@...hat.com
Cc:     stephen@...workplumber.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        jhansen@...are.com
Subject: Re: Use sock_diag instead of procfs for new address families?

From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 17:18:06 +0100

> I am implementing userspace access to socket information for AF_VSOCK.
> A few hours into writing and testing a /proc/net/vsock seq_file I
> noticed that ss(8) prefers NETLINK_SOCK_DIAG over procfs.
> 
> Before potentially wasting time implementing a legacy interface that
> won't be accepted, I thought it might be good to ask :).
> 
> Which approach is preferred?
> 1. New address families must implement only sock_diag.
> 2. Both sock_diag and procfs must be implemented.
> 3. Implement whichever interface you prefer.

Do not use procfs, that is for sure.