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  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, 03 Mar 2007 21:07:14 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	florz@....de
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, mostrows@...akeasy.net
Subject: Re: Session ID 0 with PPPoE

From: Florian Zumbiehl <florz@....de>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 03:30:00 +0100

> I noticed that the PPPoE code doesn't allow session id 0x0000 to be used
> for an actual session but rather considers 0 a special value denoting
> that the socket is unbound. Now, when reading RFC 2516, I couldn't really
> find anything that would forbid 0x0000 as a session id. Only 0xffff "is
> reserved for future use and MUST NOT be used", while 0x0000 is specified
> as the only allowed value for the session id field on certain types of
> packets, but neither can I find any statement that forbids 0x0000 as
> an ordinary session identifier, nor can I find any reasons that would
> prevent PPPoE from functioning properly with a session id of 0x0000.
> 
> Does anyone of you see any reason why a server would not be allowed to
> select 0x0000 as the session id for a PPPoE session?

I can't, feel free to provide a patch to remove this limitation
if it's important to you.
-
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists