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: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 17:54:59 -0700 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] packet: handle too big packets for PACKET_V3 On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 02:43 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > Someone could use GRO to create packet trains to hide from intrustion > detection systems, which maybe are the main user of TPACKET_V3. I don't > think this is a good idea. Presumably these tools already use a large enough bloc_size, and not a 4KB one ;) Even without GRO, a jumbo frame (9K) can trigger the bug. I do not think we need to skb_gso_segment() for the cases user setup a really small bloc_size. This looks like a lot of consumed cycles (we even might have to recompute the TCP checksums) -- 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