netdev - Re: [PATCH] route: fix ICMP redirect validation

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: <20111020.161929.97626808571871075.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:19:29 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	fbl@...hat.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] route: fix ICMP redirect validation

From: Flavio Leitner <fbl@...hat.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:47:02 -0200

> I was reviewing this again and instead of doing the above, it would
> be better to use rt_bind_peer() to update rt->peer as well.
> 
>                         if (!rt->peer)
>                                 rt_bind_peer(rt, rt->rt_dst, 1);
> 
>                         peer = rt->peer;
>                         if (peer) {
>                                 peer->redirect_learned.a4 = new_gw;
>                                 atomic_inc(&__rt_peer_genid);
>                         }
> 
> 
> but I am not sure if I understood you completely when you say
> to do such that only an inetpeer cache probe is necessary.

If you have the route entry available already and you're doing the
inetpeer lookup anyways, you might as well use rt_bind_peer() since
all of the expensive work has to be done anyways.

So yes, using rt_bind_peer() would be the best thing to do here.
--
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