netdev - Re: [RFC 1/1] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt

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]

Date:	Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:19:40 +0300
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
Cc:	Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...ia.com>,
	Netfilter Developer Mailing List 
	<netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, sameo@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_condition

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 04:44:35PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> 
> On Thursday 2010-07-22 16:09, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> >+static int condition_mt_check(const struct xt_mtchk_param *par)
> >+{
> >+	struct xt_condition_mtinfo *info = par->matchinfo;
> >+	struct condition_variable *var;
> >+	struct condition_net *cond_net =
> >+		condition_pernet(current->nsproxy->net_ns);
> 
> Cc'ing Alexey who has done the netns support.
> 
> Alexey, you added par->net, but given Luciano just did it with 
> current->nsproxy->net_ns, do we really need par->net?

In ->check, maybe, we can get away with current->nsproxy->net_ns.

But definitely not in ->destroy(), because destruction can happen
when _no_ task is in netns, so current->nsproxy->net_ns is 100% bogus.

Steps to reproduce:
	iptables -A ...
	exit

->destroy hook gets netns from par->net, ->checkentry does the same
for symmetry and less confusion.
--
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