netdev - Re: [PATCH] IPv6:fix the return interface index when get it while no message is received

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: <48AC17CA.8010306@hp.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:10:34 -0400
From:	Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
To:	Yang Hongyang <yanghy@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6:fix the return interface index when get it while
 no message is received

Yang Hongyang wrote:
> Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> Yang Hongyang wrote:
>>> David Miller wrote:
>>>> From: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:31:07 -0400
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that's correct at all.  The code path shows here is
>>>>> when there are no received options and no sticky options set.  In
>>>>> such case, we shouldn't be returning multicast or bound interfaces.
>>>>> We should be returning 0.
>>> I use setsockopt() to set the bounded interface of the socket, and 
>>> then I get receiving interface index while no message is received through
>>> the above socket,shoudn't the bounded interface be returned?
>> One of the problems is that we don't seem to support the sticky IPV6_PKTINFO
>> option as specified in rfc3542.
>>
>> The setting of SO_BINDTODEVICE should not impact the return of the sticky option
>> values when they are not set.  A return of 0 in the sticky options means that
>> that value has not been specified.  If you return anything else, you give
>> the illusion that a sticky option was set.
>>
>>>>> Additionally the address returned is completely bogus as well. We
>>>>> are returning the address our peer instead of the one of our own
>>>>> addresses.
>>> If message is received,the address returned is what the received
>>> message refered to, otherwise the address returned is what I used setsockopt()
>>> to set before.
>> We are returning np->daddr, which is the peer address.
>>
>> The expected value is "destination of the received packet".  In the worst case,
>> it should be the locally bound address.  In the correct case, it should be the
>> address set in the sticky options if such is set.  It really should be 0::0, if there
>> are no sticky options and no packets have been received.
> 
> Since here we do not recive any packet,we should return 
> src_info.ipi6_ifindex=0 and src_info.ipi6_addr=0::0,right?

That's what I've done in other implementations.

-vlad

> 
>> -vlad
>>
>>>> Yang, please fix this up, thank you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Seems that I misunderstood the RFC?
> 
> 
> 

--
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