netdev - Re: [PATCH -next 0/3] net: cap size to original frag size when refragmenting

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:	Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:16:38 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc:	fw@...len.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/3] net: cap size to original frag size when
 refragmenting

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 20:40:52 +0200

> netfilter does alter the skbs destructiveley. So the only reason we
> could use those unaltered skbs would be to save the lengths of the
> individual fragments so we could reapply them to the altered
> (constructed by reassembly) one in the output path. This seems much more
> complex to me. :/

It could process the individual fragments one by one then.  Then
at the end you could see what the final verdicts look like.

What happens right now is so damn expensive, has the geometry
issue, and is totally unnecessary %99.99999 of the time.

I therefore think there is massive value in trying to make it work to
keep the original frags around as a group and try to process them that
way.
--
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