netdev - Re: [IPV6] RAW: Add checksum default defines for MH.

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: <20070123.225953.35016491.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:59:53 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	nakam@...ux-ipv6.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	takamiya@...ntts.co.jp, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [IPV6] RAW: Add checksum default defines for MH.

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:56:23 +1100

> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> >
> > Did a complete agreement occur that this patch is ok?
> 
> My only concern is that we're putting an arbitrary list of
> protocols in the generic raw.c.  What's the justification
> for including these protocols in particular but not others?
> 
> Is there any reason why the application can't just use the
> existing IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option to set the same fields?

My understanding in the MH case is that the kernel is going
to make changes to the header that the user can't predict
and thus it's impossible for them to set the correct checksum.

I don't know what the justification is for ICMP6 though :-)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html