netdev - is it proper to do sk->sk_prot->unhash(sk) on a socket from a kernel module?

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Mar 2009 02:09:33 -0800
From:	"Deep Datta" <ddatta@...acom.com>
To:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: is it proper to do sk->sk_prot->unhash(sk) on a socket from a kernel module?

Hi,

I want to have a set of send-only UDP sockets in my kernel module (The
receives will all be handled by a single socket bound to port n &
INADDR_ANY). 

So I did a bind(), connect()and sk->sk_prot->unhash(sk) on the sockets 
such that udp_rcv()/udpv6_rcv() will not find these socket when it does
a udp_vx_lookup(), instead pushing all the packets into the single
receive socket.
These unhashed sockets are only used to do udp_sendpage().

My questions are:
Are there any issues with this approach? 
Can this design break with changes in future kernel?
Are there any other proper ways to have a send-only UDP socket?

Thanks in advance,
Deep

--
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