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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 11:59:37 -0500 From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca> To: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com> Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, arthur.marsh@...ernode.on.net, jengelh@...ozas.de, eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: inbound connection problems when "netlink: test for all flags of the NLM_F_DUMP composite" commit applied On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 17:54 +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 09:28:06AM -0500, jamal wrote: > > So here is what i think the criteria should be: > > > > If Avahi is popular and widely deployed (I dont use it anywhere), it > > makes no sense to revert. > > A middle ground is: instead of rejecting the nonsense passed, maybe a > > sane thing to do is a kernel warning for a period of time (sort of like > > feature removal warnings). > > I still don't understand why you call this the nonsense. gah! I already had plenty of caffeine when i typed that. I meant to say "If Avahi is popular and widely deployed, it makes sense to revert" > There are > two dump flags NLM_F_ROOT and NLM_F_MATCH plus for convenience > NLM_F_DUMP as 2 in 1. Avahi uses these specific flags. Why would > anybody have added these specific flags if they can never be used > separately? > > Aside from this question, if we still think it's the nonsense, a > warning would be nicer. That is what i was suggesting as well.. cheers, jamal -- 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