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:	Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:50:14 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <>
CC:	David Miller <>,,
	Linux Containers <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] net: Make AF_UNIX per network namespace safe.

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Patrick McHardy <> writes:
>>>Currently I don't fold the namesapce into the hash so multiple
>>>namespaces using the same socket name will be guaranteed a hash
>>That doesn't sound like a good thing :) Is there a reason for
>>not avoiding the collisions?
> Two reasons.  Minimizing the size of the changes to make review
> easier, and I don't know if hash collisions are likely in practice
> or if they matter.  I don't believe we can't physically collide and
> have the same inode because we make a node in the filesystem.  The
> abstract domain is local to linux and so people don't use it as much.
> All of which boils down to.  I don't see it matter a heck of a lot
> especially initially.  So I did the traditional unix thing and started
> with a simple and stupid implementation.  But it didn't quite feel
> right to me either so I documented it.
> Whipping up a patch to take the namespace into account in mkname
> doesn't look to hard though.

It doesn't look like it would increase patch size significantly
(about 4 more changed lines), but it could of course be done in
a follow-up patch.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists