| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20080812003244.GA18230@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:32:44 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: anthony@...emonkey.ws, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: csum offload and af_packet
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 11:50:25PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> I think this is deeper than that. This case is actually unusual, in that the
> packet really does arrive with a partial csum. But usually, we're exposing
> an internal detail of our stack at this point. Seems like we shouldn't if we
> know the user can't deal with it. dhcpd just makes this case less academic.
I disagree. If you're using AF_PACKET you're asking to see the
bare details. If you want to see the censored version you can
always go through the IP stack.
> We can trivially disable it in the guest or host; that's not the problem. We
> can even disable csum offload just for UDP in the host. But should we
> really?
It's not about disabling it, it's about enabling it dynamically
once guest user-space is sure that *it* can handle this.
Cheers,`
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists