netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: fix checking boundary of valid vlan id

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: <186CBD58-5106-4FCD-8C73-E4EC84C3A303@gdt.id.au>
Date:	Mon, 31 Dec 2012 22:06:43 +1030
From:	Glen Turner <gdt@....id.au>
To:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc:	akong@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix checking boundary of valid vlan id

On 30/12/2012, at 10:55 PM, Florian Westphal wrote:

> akong@...hat.com <akong@...hat.com> wrote:
>> From: Amos Kong <akong@...hat.com>
>> 
>> 4096 is not a valid vlan id.
> 
> True.
> 
> But why shouldn't users be allowed to check for frames
> with reserved value

It may be a valid VLAN ID, or it may not. The meaning of FFF is reserved for vendor use, which doesn't preclude a vendor using it as a (non-interoperable) VLAN identifier. Many vendor's products treat 4096 as they do any other VID.

It's up to Linux if it cares to treat 4096 as a VLAN or as something else.

In any case, Florian's point is good: an ethernet-layer firewall should be able to trigger on any value of VID, and particularly one which should not be seen from some vendor's gear.

-glen--
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