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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 23:49:30 +0930 From: David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com> To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@....org>, Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@...dora.be> CC: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Bad checksum on bridge with IP options On 12/05/14 23:21, Florian Westphal wrote: > Agree, bridge should not alter ip options. It would be easy to remove the call to ip_options_compile instead of recalculating checksum after it, but I suspect there may be good reasons why this, too, would be wrong. The source file is br_netfilter.c, suggesting that a change in options is needed in some situations. In the situation that caught my attention, it obviously does it wrong (probably didn't add 0.0.0.0 to the route record, probably just incremented the pointer; and seriously damaged the timestamps as well as an incremented pointer without actually adding a value.) I'm in a quandary. Is it possible that bridge has exceeded it's mandate? I can't find it now, but I saw a comment that it just copies packets unchanged. I think it's use now goes further than that would allow. I welcome words of advice. -- 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