netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 1/5] net-timestamp: no-payload option

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: <CA+FuTSe90dh+8QnABH=GGVrExqjur_OW8WaWS3b6J2BogbhCQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 9 Jan 2015 16:18:38 -0500
From:	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 1/5] net-timestamp: no-payload option

On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>>>> From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Add timestamping option SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_TSONLY. For transmit
>>>>>> timestamps, this loops timestamps on top of empty packets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doing so reduces the pressure on SO_RCVBUF. Payload inspection and
>>>>>> cmsg reception (aside from timestamps) are no longer possible. This
>>>>>> works together with a follow on patch that allows administrators to
>>>>>> only allow tx timestamping if it does not loop payload or metadata.
>>>>>
>>>>> If this loses IP_PKTINFO, that will be a bit unfortunate.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If it doesn't, then we might as well loop the entire payload. For applications
>>>> that need pktinfo or other cmsg, do not select the option.
>>>
>>> Right, but it loses the ability to get the ifindex if the sysctl is
>>> set to the conservative option, which I don't think is desirable.
>>
>> Understood. I just find the alternative, where the no-data policy is
>> weakened by exceptions, even less desirable. That makes it
>> harder to explain what the sysctl/option do and what the security
>> implications are.
>
> Agreed.
>
> If there was no-payload but not no-cmsg, then it would be a nice
> middle ground, but I guess that's bad for some reason involving
> accounting?

Enabling all cmsg opens up quite a few holes, including the tos
options that we previously discussed. Also, these are implemented
by reading the relevant bits from the payload at recvmsg time, so
at least we would have to queue the full payload (though not
necessarily return it).

> --Andy
>
> --
> Andy Lutomirski
> AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
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