netdev - Re: Namespaces and inetpeer

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]

Message-ID: <20120312095840.GM15404@secunet.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:58:40 +0100
From:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Namespaces and inetpeer

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 02:35:05AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:57:56 +0100
> 
> > On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 12:25:29AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >> Hi:
> >> 
> >> While looking through the inetpeer code I noticed that there is
> >> no namespace support at all.  This means that metric and other
> >> information will be leaking across namespaces.  As IP addresses
> >> are meant to be independent between them, this is not a good thing.
> >> 
> > 
> > Actually, it would be nice if we could have an inetpeer base per
> > fib table. This would imply namespace awareness and it would
> > handle the problem when we have mulitiple routes (with different
> > metrics etc.) to the same ip address on policy routing.
> 
> Then you will ask for one per security policy too, to handle IPSEC.

Hm, I don't see why this would be needed too.

It was just an idea to handle the metrcis with policy routing.
Better ideas are very welcome of course :)
--
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