linux-kernel - Re: [regression] TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets

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, 30 Jun 2020 13:56:10 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Rajotte-Julien <joraj@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [regression] TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:44 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:39:27 -0700
>
> > The (C) & (B) case are certainly doable.
> >
> > A) case is more complex, I have no idea of breakages of various TCP
> > stacks if a flow got SACK
> > at some point (in 3WHS) but suddenly becomes Reno.
>
> I agree that C and B are the easiest to implement without having to
> add complicated code to handle various negotiated TCP option
> scenerios.
>
> It does seem to be that some entities do A, or did I misread your
> behavioral analysis of various implementations Mathieu?
>
> Thanks.

Yes, another question about Mathieu cases is do determine the behavior
of all these stacks vs :
SACK option
TCP TS option.