| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4C321F91.90304@redfish-solutions.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 12:08:17 -0600 From: Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx@...fish-solutions.com> To: Alexander Clouter <alex@...riz.org.uk> CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability? Say, on a slightly different subject... but still having to do with setsockopt(IP_TOS)... is it intentional that system call effectively does nothing if the socket is in listen(), connect(), or bind() states? In other words, you have to issue the setsockopt() immediately after the socket() call, or it doesn't do anything. As I remember, that's slightly different semantics from BSD, which allows you to change the markings on a bound or listening socket. I've not walked through the kernel sources to see why this is. -Philip -- 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