netdev - Re: [RFC, PATCH 2.6.29.2] Ethernet V2.0 Configuration Testing Protocol, revision 20090428

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: <87tz41gqr0.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date:	Mon, 04 May 2009 11:29:55 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Mark Smith 
	<lnx-netdev@...22607b6285f9c5d5ea31ea9d8a7ac.nosense.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 2.6.29.2] Ethernet V2.0 Configuration Testing Protocol, revision 20090428

Mark Smith <lnx-netdev@...22607b6285f9c5d5ea31ea9d8a7ac.nosense.org> writes:
> +
> +4. Security
> +
> +ECTP was designed in the early 1980s, when protocol security was less of
> +a concern than it is now. Consequently, there are some features of the
> +protocol which could be abused for nefarious purposes. By default, this
> +implementation attempts to avoid participating in them. These features
> +could be useful for some test cases thought, so they can be enabled if
> +required.

I think security would need quite a bit more discussion. Opening new
DOS this way sounds quite worrying, especially since this is a
extremly obscure protocol that likely most admins don't know much
about.

Is this suspencible to ping to broadcast flood replication for example?

Safest would probably be default to off.

-Andi


-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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