netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] sockopt: Make SO

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: <50851DF4.7050704@parallels.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:20:36 +0400
From:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] sockopt: Make SO_BINDTODEVICE readable

On 10/22/2012 04:43 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:55:56 +0400
> 
>> The SO_BINDTODEVICE option is the only SOL_SOCKET one that can be set, but
>> cannot be get via sockopt API. The only way we can find the device id a
>> socket is bound to is via sock-diag interface. But the diag works only on
>> hashed sockets, while the opt in question can be set for yet unhashed one.
>>
>> That said, in order to know what device a socket is bound to (we do want
>> to know this in checkpoint-restore project) I propose to make this option
>> getsockopt-able and report the respective device index.
>>
>> Another solution to the problem might be to teach the sock-diag reporting
>> info on unhashed sockets. Should I go this way instead?
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
> 
> Applied.  I can't believe we didn't support this when the feature
> was added.
> 
> I guess we figured that if the application made this setting, then
> it knows and doesn't need to query it.
> .

AFAIS such decision (application that configures something knows what it is) was
made for many things. The same is true at least for the SO_ATTACH_FILTER option
and for the shutdown syscall. Both add something to a socket that cannot be queried
back. And I'm now thinking which way for getting one would be better.

Thanks,
Pavel
--
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