linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ip_tunnel: fix ip_tunnel

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, 08 Jul 2014 15:12:10 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ixaphire@...tor.net
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ip_tunnel: fix ip_tunnel_lookup

From: Dmitry Popov <ixaphire@...tor.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 02:26:37 +0400

> @@ -205,6 +207,8 @@ struct ip_tunnel *ip_tunnel_lookup(struct ip_tunnel_net *itn,
>  
>  	hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(t, head, hash_node) {
>  		if (t->parms.i_key != key ||
> +		    t->parms.iph.saddr != 0 ||
> +		    t->parms.iph.daddr != 0 ||
>  		    !(t->dev->flags & IFF_UP))
>  			continue;
>  

I don't really understand the logic of these tests.

Usually the canonical way to test these kinds of things is:

	if (parms->saddr && parms->saddr != saddr)
		goto no_match;

But you are signalling a non-match any time the address is not a
wildcard.

Why?
--
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/