netdev - Is CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 still/really dangerous?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87631y3nr3.fsf@tac.ki.iif.hu>
Date:	Fri, 04 Jun 2010 15:56:16 +0200
From:	Ferenc Wagner <wferi@...f.hu>
To:	Julius Volz <juliusv@...gle.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Is CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 still/really dangerous?

Hi,

In commit fab0de02fb0da83b90cec7fce4294747d86d5c6f CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 is
described as:

    Add IPv6 support to IPVS. This is incomplete and might be dangerous.

I agree its implementation is incomplete.  But I wonder if it's really
dangerous in the sense that generic distribution kernels shouldn't
enable it, because it can break unrelated (eg. IPv4 IPVS) functionality.

What does that warning mean today?  Isn't it out of date?
-- 
Thanks,
Feri.
--
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