netdev - Re: [E1000-devel] [PATCH] e100: Fix inconsistency in bad frames handling

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:57:08 -0700
From:	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
To:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
CC:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	Andrea Merello <andrea.merello@...il.com>,
	"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] [PATCH] e100: Fix inconsistency in bad frames
 handling

On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 10:30 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> >> How would a received skb be flagged as having a CRC error?
> >>
> >
> > maybe some skb->pkt_type = PACKET_INVALID; or something...
> 
> Jesse:  If I can get the ethtool related patches accepted, would
> you accept patches to e100 (and other Intel drivers) for
> this feature?

seems like a reasonable thing, but, there is some risk that might
prevent us turning this on however, because we often like our hardware
to discard bad frames because (especially) long ones can use quite a few
buffers.

I still am generally uncomfortable with this idea.  We've survived a
long time without it and it opens up the possibility of extra bugs (like
possible security issues, etc) with very little opportunity for
worthwhile gain.

Jesse