netdev - Re: [PATCH 6/6] net: move qdisc ingress filtering on top of netfilter ingress hooks

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: <20150430163634.GA3814@salvia>
Date:	Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:36:34 +0200
From:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] net: move qdisc ingress filtering on top of
 netfilter ingress hooks

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 06:09:25PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> I think both have different use cases, though, but on cls_bpf side you
> have maps infrastructure that is evolving as well. Not really speaking
> about the other remaining classifiers, however. I also don't want to go
> any further into this vim vs emacs debate. ;) And, personally, I also
> don't have any issue offering alternatives to users.
> 
> However, I still disagree with moving ingress behind this artificial
> barrier if it's just not necessary. I believe, in your RFC v1 patch,
> you had a second ingress hook as a static key for nft, I tend to like
> that much better consensus-wise. Both subsystems should not put
> unnecessary barriers into their way, really.

I'm evolving to think that it would be good to have a single entry
point for ingress filtering.

But where are the barriers? These unfounded performance claims are
simply absurd, qdisc ingress barely performs a bit better just because
it executes a bit less code and only in the single CPU scenario with
no rules at all.
--
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