linux-kernel - Re: [flame^Wreview] net: netprio_cgroup: rework update socket logic

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: <20120813170109.GD23464@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 13 Aug 2012 18:01:09 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [flame^Wreview] net: netprio_cgroup: rework update socket logic

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:58:12AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> [...]
> 
> >HOWEVER, it still doesn't address more fundamental problem - somebody
> >creating a socket and passing it to you in SCM_RIGHTS datagram will
> >leave you with a socket you can do IO on, still tagged according to who
> >had created it.
> >
> >AFAICS, the whole point of that exercise was to allow third-party changing
> >the priorities of traffic on sockets already created by a process we now
> >move to a different cgroup.  Consider e.g. this:
> 
> Correct that is the point of the exercise.
> 
> To fix this specific case we could add a call to sock_update_netprioidx
> in scm_recv to set the sk_cgrp_prioidx value.

On every received descriptor, that is?  Eeek...
--
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/