netdev - Re: openvswitch/flow WAS ( Re: [rfc] Merging the Open vSwitch datapath

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:56:18 +0200
From:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
Cc:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>, Ben Pfaff <blp@...ira.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ovs-team@...ira.com
Subject: Re: openvswitch/flow WAS ( Re: [rfc] Merging the Open vSwitch
 datapath

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 06:22:48AM -0400, jamal wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 17:20 +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> 
> > As I understand things, the packet goes from the kernel to userspace
> > and then (typically) comes back again.
> 
> Injection back is trivial.
> 
> > I guess that it would be possible to send a copy of the headers
> > to user-sapce while the packet is quarantined in the kernel pending
> > a response from user-space. I say only the headers, as typically
> > that is all user-space needs to make a decision, though I guess it
> > may need the body to make some types of decisions. I have no idea
> > if such a scheme would be desirable in any circumstances.
> 
> quarantine the packet in the kernel would be trickier than sending the
> whole thing up - for a sample of how it is done i believe the netfilter
> approach (ipq?) as well as ipsec would be good samples to look at.

Ok, lets forget my quarantine idea - I was just thinking aloud.

--
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