netdev - Re: [PATCH] ipv6: judge the accept_ra_defrtr before calling rt6_route

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 02 Dec 2013 16:01:07 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc:	duanj.fnst@...fujitsu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: judge the accept_ra_defrtr before calling
 rt6_route_rcv

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 07:09:45 +0100

> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 03:46:56PM +0800, Duan Jiong wrote:
>> 
>> when dealing with a RA message, if accept_ra_defrtr is false,
>> the kernel will not add the default route, and then deal with
>> the following route information options. Unfortunately, those
>> options maybe contain default route, so let's judge the
>> accept_ra_defrtr before calling rt6_route_rcv.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Duan Jiong <duanj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
> 
> I am ambivalent regarding this change.
> 
> accept_ra_defrtr protected against adding default routers without routing
> options and accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen == -1 disables the acceptance of any
> routing options in router advertisments.
> 
> I don't have an idea why we need this distinction altough I once used it for
> testing. But because this change makes it more understandable for users I am
> ok with that.

I've applied this, thanks everyone.
--
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