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: <20120422.170658.1841749508208198136.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:06:58 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	jhs@...atatu.com
Cc:	stephen.hemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	dev@...nvswitch.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com, horms@...ge.net.au
Subject: Re: [RFC v4] Add TCP encap_rcv hook (repost)

From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 11:54:42 -0400

> On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 08:22 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> 
>> Therefore Simon's
>> proposed hook is the only way to support it. But exposing that
>> hook does allow for other misuse.
> 
> If you object to this, then you gotta object to the UDP equivalent 
> which has been around for sometime now for legitimate reasons
> and could be used by STT (I think the claim was no hardware
> does USO);->

I don't think so, for the UDP case it's much different.  All the
necessary "protocol" work has been performed on the packet by the time
the encap handler runs for UDP.

I'm not saying I still object to this TCP thing, however.
--
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