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  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:   Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:37:01 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Bart Groeneveld' <>,
        Patches internal <>
CC:     "David S . Miller" <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        Jonathan Corbet <>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] net: Use standardized (IANA) local port range

From: Bart Groeneveld
> Sent: 28 August 2020 21:40
> IANA specifies User ports as 1024-49151,
> and Private ports (local/ephemeral/dynamic/w/e) as 49152-65535 [1].
> This means Linux uses 32768-49151 'illegally'.
> This is not just a matter of following specifications:
> IANA actually assigns numbers in this range [1].

Linux is using the 'historic' values.
IANA shouldn't really have 'grabbed' half the port number space.
Really the 'problem' of TCP port numbers identifying the service
as well as the connection should have been addresses by some other
means (eg using port 1023 and a TCP option to select the serivce).

Changing the default base from 32k to 48k will break some existing
systems if/when a kernel upgrade is installed.

You are also changing the numbers for UDP.
Anyone doing a lot of RTP (which typically requires 2 adjacent
UDP ports) is already constrained by the availability or ports.


Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists