netdev - Re: [PATCHv2] netfilter: Remove skb_is_nonlinear check from nf_conntrack

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: <alpine.LSU.2.01.1005142133001.16437@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Date:	Fri, 14 May 2010 21:33:38 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
cc:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] netfilter: Remove skb_is_nonlinear check from
 nf_conntrack_sip


On Friday 2010-05-14 21:26, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>> Should this be NF_DROP? As I understand it skb_linearize only failes
>>> if it runs out of memory, which probably means dropping is OK. But
>>> passing a packet that might need rewriting could be harmful..
>> 
>> We so far also didn't rewrite the packet. But agreed, its
>> a corner case and dropping it is the safer choice.
>
>This is what I've added to my tree. Tested with asterisk and TSO
>enabled NIC, which fails without this patch.
>

[..patch..]

Shouldn't we do this for the other nf_conntrack_xyz too?
That would mean getting rid of the size-limited locked packet
buffer.
--
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