netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: Add TCP

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: <CAKfDRXiOQK2Mc=OS26Pox-bpsca74uStm4RB5o5jKkhkD6d_5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:11:30 +0200
From:	Kristian Evensen <kristian.evensen@...il.com>
To:	Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: Add TCP_FREEZE socket option

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com> wrote:
> At least split TCP is transparent to applications, while your approach is not.
> I don't understand why you said it typically operates on some ports, since
> TCP is stateful.

I see that I might have used the wrong word here. I am use to calling
them TCP splitters, but I see that the devices are also referred to as
transparent TCP proxies. Anyhow, they are still transparent, but they
violate end-to-end (even though I guess that is pretty common
now-a-days).

What I mean by the port-comment is that only connections to some ports
are proxied/split. For example, one of the operators in Norway only
proxy port 80, so any HTTPS transfer risk getting stuck after a
temporary disconnect.

-Kristian
--
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