netdev - Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

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: <200707111919.11746@auguste.remlab.net>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:19:11 +0300
From:	Rémi Denis-Courmont <rdenis@...phalempin.com>
To:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki /
	 吉藤英明 
	<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

Le mercredi 11 juillet 2007, David Stevens a écrit :
>         That sounds like a good idea to me (FWIW),
> though I also still think a simple raw-socket
> application would do it just fine, possibly with
> no kernel modification at all.
>         But since the kernel wouldn't be maintaining
> the DNS info, which was my real objection to the
> original version,  netlink would work well too.

One remaining corner case is NFS/IPv6 root, whereby userland won't have 
a chance to start before the network, and hence may miss the solicited 
RA. Or would it? By default, the next unsolicited RA can be anytime 
from now to after 10 minutes, so that's not sufficient. I wouldn't 
personnaly care, but...

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net/
-
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