netdev - Re: [PATCH rfc 1/4] net-timestamp: pull headers for SOCK

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]

Date:	Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:42:40 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	willemb@...gle.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, luto@...capital.net,
	richardcochran@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH rfc 1/4] net-timestamp: pull headers for SOCK_STREAM

From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:58:03 -0500

> From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
> 
> When returning timestamped packets on the error queue, only return
> the data that the application initially sent: not the protocol
> headers.
> 
> This changes the ABI. The TCP interface is new enough that it should
> be safe to do so. The UDP interface could be changed analogously with
> 
> +  else if (sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP)
> +    skb_pull(skb, skb_transport_offset(skb) + sizeof(struct udphdr));
> 
> Tested with Documentation/networking/timestamping/txtimestamp -l 60 -x
> 
> Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>

What's the harm in exposing the headers?  Either it's harmful, and
therefore doing so for UDP is bad too, or it's harmless and we should
probably leave it alone to not risk breaking anyone.

--
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