netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/7 net-2.6.25] [IPV4]: Prohibit assignment of 0.0.0.0 as interface address.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4799F441.9050705@fr.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:37:53 +0100
From:	Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
To:	"Denis V. Lunev" <den@...ru>
CC:	"Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7 net-2.6.25] [IPV4]: Prohibit assignment of 0.0.0.0
 as interface address.

Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> Denis V. Lunev wrote:
>>> I could hardly imagine why sombady needs to assign 0.0.0.0 as an
>>> interface
>>> address or interface destination address. The kernel will behave in a
>>> strage
>>> way in several places if this is possible, as ifa_local != 0 is
>>> considered
>>> as initialized/non-initialized state of the ifa.
>> AFAICS, we should be able to set at an interface address to 0.0.0.0, in
>> order to remove an IP address from an interface and keep this one up.
>> I see two trivial cases:
>>  * remove the ipv4 on an interface but continue to use it through ipv6
>>  * move ipv4 address from the interface to an attached bridge
> 
> For this case there is an IOCTL/netlink "remove IP address".

That's right. But there are people relying on 0.0.0.0 to remove IP 
addresses, especially in the bridge scripts.
--
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