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  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:	Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:04:38 -0500
From:	jamal <>
To:	Patrick McHardy <>
Cc:	KOVACS Krisztian <>,
	KOVACS Krisztian <>,
	Andreas Schultz <>,,
Subject: Re: [tproxy,regression] tproxy broken in 2.6.32

On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 16:46 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:

> The root cause seems to be an invalid assumption, marks are often not
> used in a symetric fashion as required by RPF.

The only assumption is: if you set set up a mark on incoming, you are
asking the reverse validation that is to be used to consider that mark.

This has nothing to do with RPF really;-> RPF is off. There is a legit
bug in the old setup that has a table programmed with a route that is
not unicast. 

> Since this patch has already proven to break existing setups, I think
> it should be reverted or the behaviour made optional with a default to
> off.

I disagree. What other setup is broken? ;->


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists