netdev - Re: port bound SAs

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: <497F477E.6020209@trash.net>
Date:	Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:42:22 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Paul Moore <paul.moore@...trify.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: port bound SAs

Paul Moore wrote:
> OK I misunderstood. Sorry
>
> You are saying that the port number should be dropped by the pfkey /
> xfrm interface - OK
>   

Yes. I think thats also why it includes the unique" option.

> This is actually what happens. (BTW this is fortunate - in a few cases
> racoon accidentally passes down 500)
>
> I meant that the consensus was that the wire behavior is wrong. 

Yes, if the selectors would actually differ, it would be wrong.
--
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