netdev - Re: IPV4: Enable IP_ID sequencing for all traffic (inquiring minds want to know why its set to zero)

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: <20080716.132742.24082252.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	cl@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IPV4: Enable IP_ID sequencing for all traffic (inquiring minds
 want to know why its set to zero)

From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:56:21 -0500

> There is some security reason why we set IP_ID == 0 right? Could
> someone point me at the discussions that lead to having IP_ID be
> zero? Have not been involved in network that much so forgive my
> ignorance.... and I can only find some hints about why this was done
> here and there using google.

As David mentioned, one reason is that the less you allocate the less often
ID wrap occurs, which is a very real issue on high speed networks.

I think a more important question is what do you want it re-enabled?
You must have stumbled upon this for a reason. :-)
--
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