netdev - Re: IPV6 source routing patch is still broken?

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:	Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	cebbert@...hat.com
Cc:	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IPV6 source routing patch is still broken?

From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:53:58 -0400

> Looking at the patch that went into 2.6.20.9, I can't see
> how type 2 packets get through at all. Shouldn't this part
> read:
> 
> +       case IPV6_SRCRT_TYPE_2:
> +               if (accept_source_route >= 0)
> +                       break;
> +               kfree_skb(skb);
> +               return -1;
> +       case IPV6_SRCRT_TYPE_0:
> +               if (accept_source_route > 0)
> +                       break;
> +               kfree_skb(skb);
> +               return -1;

Yes, that looks like it matches the sysctl documentation more closely:

accept_source_route - INTEGER
	Accept source routing (routing extension header).

	> 0: Accept routing header.
	= 0: Accept only routing header type 2.
	< 0: Do not accept routing header.

Type 2 packets should get through as long as the value of the sysctl
is not negative.

Hmmm?
-
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