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:	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:55:38 +0800
From:	Wang Chen <>
To:	David Miller <>
CC:,,,,,,,, Wang Chen <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [IPV4] UDP: Always checksum even if without socket

David Miller said the following on 2007-11-21 9:39:
> From: Andi Kleen <>
> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:05:18 +0100
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 12:29:45AM -0500, Bill Fink wrote:
>>> While I agree with your analysis that it could be worked around,
>>> who knows how all the various SNMP monitoring applications out there
>>> would interpret such an unusual event.  I liked Stephen's suggestion
>>> of a deferred decrement that would insure the counter didn't ever
>>> run backwards.  But the best approach seems to be just not to count
>>> it in the first place until tha application has actually received
>>> the packet, since as Herbert pointed out, that's what the RFC
>>> actually specifies for the meaning of the udpInDatagrams counter.
>> Together with another counter that counts "edge datagrams received"
>> that would be an excellent idea.
>> Here's a patch.
> NFS and friends that use the ->data_ready() callback needs to
> be updated as well.  Please fix this and resubmit, thanks.

I tested nfsv3 & nfsv4. It seems that nfs calls recvmsg() like
So, I think putting the udpInDatagrams increment in udp_recvmsg()
is enough.


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