netdev - Re: [PATCH v4] netfilter: ipt_CLUSTERIP: remove "no conntrack!"

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: <1294929579.3570.163.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2011 15:39:39 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
Cc:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	Netfilter Development Mailinglist 
	<netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] netfilter: ipt_CLUSTERIP: remove "no conntrack!"

Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 15:02 +0100, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
> On Thursday 2011-01-13 14:38, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> >Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 12:54 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso a écrit :
> >
> >> But printing this does not provide any useful information. The first
> >> packet that does not belong to the cluster node that has received the
> >> packet, or the first invalid packet, will trigger this.
> >> 
> >> Moreover, this confuses users since they can do nothing if they receive
> >> this message.
> >> 
> >> Moreover, this target should be supersedes by the cluster match, which
> >> has been there for quite some time (it's also more flexible).
> >
> >Now you mentioned it, cluster match is not as flexible right now,
> >its hashing is on source_ip only.
> 
> I think in that case, xt_cluster should be improved rather
> than an old module.

Amen

We should not improve IPv4 support then, I see.

My customers use this old module, and upgrading to xt_cluster is not an
option.

Should we discuss this forever or fix it ?

In the end, people are forced to add useless iptables rule to DROP
INVALID packets before entering ipt_CLUSTERIP, after googling or
eventually asking to experts.

Last time this was discussed, this went nowhere :

http://www.spinics.net/lists/netfilter/msg48676.html

Come on guys, we can do it, dont be afraid.

A non rate limited printk() in kernel is forbidden, especially in
network stack.

Then, cluster match can be improved, I am sure you already have a patch
for it.



--
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