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: <20120105141859.GA8210@1984>
Date:	Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:18:59 +0100
From:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>
Cc:	Hans Schillstrom <hans.schillstrom@...csson.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] netfilter: Add possibility to turn off netfilters
 defrag per netns

On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:11:28AM +0100, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
> OK, I see. Conntrack is per net namespace but it's enabled globally.
>  
> So at the moment I think the best solution is something like your patch 
> variant (but the condition is wrong, it should be "&& !skb->nfct"):
> 
> --- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_defrag_ipv4.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_defrag_ipv4.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,14 @@ static unsigned int ipv4_conntrack_defrag(unsigned int
> hooknum,
> ...
> +       const struct net_device *dev = (hooknum == NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT ?
> +                                       out : in);
> +
> +       /* No defrag and not Previously seen (loopback)? */
> +       if (dev_net(dev)->ct.sysctl_notrac_defrag && skb->nfct) {
> +               /* Attach fake conntrack entry. as in NOTRACK */
> +               skb->nfct = &nf_ct_untracked_get()->ct_general;
> +               skb->nfctinfo = IP_CT_NEW;
> +               nf_conntrack_get(skb->nfct);
> +               return NF_ACCEPT;
> +       }
> ...

I prefer the sysctl option as well, the new table is too much and it
remains too specific for this.

I wonder if we can conditionally register the sysctl only if we are
inside one lxc container.

I'm telling this because this sysctl does not seem to make any sense
to me outside of 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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ