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:	Sun, 27 Dec 2009 10:39:28 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:	michael@...top.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Security: Document disablenetwork. (v4)

Tetsuo Handa wrote
> sendmsg(fd, (struct sockadr *) &addr, sizeof(addr));
I meant
sendto(fd, buffer, len, 0, (struct sockadr *) &addr, sizeof(addr));

Michael Stone wrote:
> +Exceptions are made for
> +  * processes calling sendmsg() on a previously connected socket
> +      (i.e. one with msg.msg_name == NULL && msg.msg_namelen == 0) or

What should we do for non connection oriented protocols (e.g. UDP)
but destination is already configured by previous connect() request?

struct sockaddr_in addr = { ... };
int fd2 = socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, 0);
connect(fd2, (struct sockadr *) &addr, sizeof(addr));
prctl( ... );
sendto(fd2, buffer, len, 0, NULL, 0); /* Should we allow this? */
sendto(fd2, buffer, len, 0, (struct sockadr *) &addr, sizeof(addr)); /* Should we reject this? */
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists