netdev - Re: [patch net-next 1/2 v3] tc: add BPF based action

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:	Wed, 14 Jan 2015 07:39:34 -0800
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 1/2 v3] tc: add BPF based action

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:28 AM, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> I'm still wondering about the drop semantics ... wouldn't it be more
> intuitive to use 0 for drops in this context?

good point.
I think it must be 0 to match behavior of socket filters, etc.
If program tries to access beyond packet size or does divide
by zero if will be terminated and will return 0.
So zero should be the safest action from caller point of view.
--
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