linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: bridge: Add support for bridge port in locked mode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 7 Feb 2022 14:53:32 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc:     Hans Schultz <schultz.hans@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Hans Schultz <schultz.hans+netdev@...il.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: bridge: Add support for bridge port in
 locked mode

> > +	if (p->flags & BR_PORT_LOCKED) {
> > +		fdb_entry = br_fdb_find_rcu(br, eth_hdr(skb)->h_source, vid);
> > +		if (!(fdb_entry && fdb_entry->dst == p))
> > +			goto drop;
> 
> I'm not familiar with 802.1X so I have some questions:

Me neither.

> 
> 1. Do we need to differentiate between no FDB entry and an FDB entry
> pointing to a different port than we expect?

And extending that question, a static vs a dynamic entry?

    Andrew