netdev - Weak host model vs .interface down

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: <OF1D06F11A.44DE8C5A-ONC125773F.00437856-C125773F.004425B9@transmode.se>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jun 2010 14:24:21 +0200
From:	Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Weak host model vs .interface down

Linux uses the weak host model which makes the IP addresses part of the system
rather than the interface. However consider this:

System A, eth0 connected to the network
# > ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.16
# > ifconfig eth1 192.168.1.17 down

System B
# > ping 192.168.1.17
PING 192.168.1.17 (192.168.1.17) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.17: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.618 ms

Isn't it a bit much to respond on 192.168.1.17 when its interface is down?
I even tried to set rp_filter=1 for all interfaces and that didn't help
either(not that I should need to)

   Jocke

--
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