netdev - Re: Question about default route handling/lookup in a custom table

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: <20130723134715.GC32523@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date:	Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:47:15 +0200
From:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To:	JP Abgrall <jpa@...gle.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about default route handling/lookup in a custom table

Hello!

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 06:20:18PM -0700, JP Abgrall wrote:
> The following sequence fails when adding the default route:
> (wlan0 is up, nothing is trying to manage,...)
> 
>        ip route flush dev wlan0 table all
>        ip route flush table 60
>        ip route add 1.1.1.1/32 dev wlan0 table 60

I am not sure but would have expected that you needed to add a rule e.g. ip
rule add oif wlan0 table 60 to successfully match the next route insertion.

>        ip route add default via 1.1.1.1 dev wlan0 table 60

Otherwise another rule lookup could alter the fib_lookup in such a way that the
nexthop is not resolveable and the routing table in its entirty could have
unresolveable holes.

I did not check the code, this is just my intuition.

Greetings,

  Hannes

--
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