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]

Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:50:12 -0400
From:	Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
To:	Rémi Denis-Courmont <rdenis@...phalempin.com>
Cc:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ???? <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> 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...
> 

You've got the same issue with the socket option approach.

-vlad
-
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