netdev - Re: [PATCH] Multicast packet reassembly can fail

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: <OFF3B08FBF.39A0F6F8-ON8825765D.006E5150-8825765D.006EFF93@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:12:24 -0700
From:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
To:	Steve Chen <schen@...sta.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Multicast packet reassembly can fail

I haven't gone through the entire thread yet, but I should point
out that this appears to break regular IP fragmentation for
unicast packets. There is no restriction whatsoever that
fragments from a remote destination that are actually for
the same datagram need to be routed on the same paths
and received on the same input interface.

For the multicast case, if they are from the same datagram,
it doesn't matter how you got them. If it's a different datagram
with the same ID, which can happen anyway, the checksum
should fail (at least (64K-1) of 64K cases). I don't see a special
case here, other than that you can tell by the interface if it was
actually a distinct datagram with the same ID in the multicast
case (and only in multicast and only if the different interfaces
are not in the same multicast routing domain).

NACK.

                                        +-DLS

--
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