linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] TCP: add option for silent port knocking with integrity protection

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: <87bo0nulkt.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 Dec 2013 13:25:22 -0800
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:	Christian Grothoff <grothoff@...tum.de>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, knock@...net.org, jacob@...elbaum.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TCP: add option for silent port knocking with integrity protection

Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org> writes:
>
> The point is that doing it outside of TCP core is safer, less error prone
> and more flexible.

Or to put the question differently: what hooks would be needed to make
this efficiently work in user space?

It could be something like this: Firewall the port with forwarding the 
SYN packets using nfqueue, check for the SYN having the right magic,
change a firewall rule, re-inject using nfqueue (not fully sure how
well that works)

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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/