linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH v5 0/3] net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers

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]

Message-ID: <4B7F993C.9000007@redhat.com>
Date:	Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:11:40 +0800
From:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To:	Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5 0/3] net: reserve ports for applications using
 fixed port numbers

Octavian Purdila wrote:
> This patch introduces /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_reserved_ports which
> allows users to reserve ports for third-party applications.
> 
> The reserved ports will not be used by automatic port assignments
> (e.g. when calling connect() or bind() with port number 0). Explicit
> port allocation behavior is unchanged.
> 
> Changes from the previous version:
> - switch the /proc entry format to coma separated list of range ports
> - treat -EFAULT just like any other error and acknowledge written values
> - use isdigit() in proc_get_ulong
> 
> Octavian Purdila (3):
>   sysctl: refactor integer handling proc code
>   sysctl: add proc_do_large_bitmap
>   net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers

Hi,

This version looks fine for me, but I need to give them a test, and
I will put feedbacks asap. Thanks for your work!

Still two things:

1) bitops are always atomic on every arch, right? If yes, then ok.
2) I hope you could add some documentation to show the relations
    between ip_local_port_range and ip_local_reserved_ports.

Thanks!

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/