netdev - Re: [RFC] netlink: add socket destruction notification

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]

Date:	Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:57:26 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
CC:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jouni Malinen <j@...fi>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: [RFC] netlink: add socket destruction notification

Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 14:19 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
>>> Ok, cool, thanks. Do you want me to send the change removing the
>>> multicast check, or would you want to do that since you audited all the
>>> netlink callers?
>> Please go ahead.
> 
> Will do.
> 
>>> Also, it's called URELEASE for unicast -- should we rename it to just
>>> RELEASE?
>> I think URELEASE is still fine since won't necessarily get called
>> for sockets that are used for pure multicast reception when using
>> setsockopt to bind to groups.
> 
> Oh? So on which sockets can I rely on it being used? After sending at
> least one unicast message into the kernel? This seems to depend on pid
> being assigned -- when is that?

All unicast sockets that have either manually or automatically
bound. Automatic binding happens when sending the first message
or when calling connect().

Before that, your code can't know of the sockets existance, so
I guess this should be fine.
--
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