netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Keep interface binding when sending packets with ipi

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: <6c039e090908041706p6f06ac55ja796ac53855e829a@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Aug 2009 08:06:25 +0800
From:	Chia-chi Yeh (葉家齊) <chiachi@...roid.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	john.dykstra1@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Keep interface binding when sending packets with 
	ipi_ifindex = 0

2009/8/5 David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>:
> I think we really cannot change behavior here.  If the user specifies
> "0" in ipi_ifindex we must respect that in ipc->oif.  This is an
> override, and the ability to override is the very purpose of this
> control message.
>
> Even GLIBC makes use of that case of specifying "0" in ipi_ifindex.
> We must respect it.
>
> I'm not applying any of these patches, sorry.
>

If you treat ipi_ifindex as an override, do you want to do that in
ipi6_ifindex as well? Also, CAP_NET_RAW check for SO_BINDTODEVICE
becomes meaningless in this case.

I did not find the usage of ipi_ifindex in glibc. It would be great if
you can give me some pointers. Thanks for your help.

Chia-chi
--
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