netdev - Re: [PATCH] LSM: Add post recvmsg() hook.

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: <20100718.142550.25115105.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, pekkas@...core.fi,
	jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net,
	paul.moore@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LSM: Add post recvmsg() hook.

From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:49:11 +0900

> Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> I read this patch and could not find out if an SNMP counter was
>> increased in the case a frame was not delivered but dropped in kernel
>> land.
> 
> UDP_MIB_INDATAGRAMS and UDP_MIB_INERRORS will not be increased
> if dropped by security_socket_post_recvmsg()'s decision.
> Should we increment UDP_MIB_INDATAGRAMS and/or UDP_MIB_INERRORS?

This decision should be guided by what we do for in the case
of the other existing security hooks.

I don't think it makes any sense to make the post recvmsg() hook
behave any differently from the existing hooks in this regard.
--
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