[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150924013800.GA4495@verge.net.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:38:03 +0900
From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next 02/84] ipvs: Don't use current in
proc_do_defense_mode
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 08:53:30PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 01:01:39PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Instead store ipvs in extra2 so that proc_do_defense_mode can easily
> >> find the ipvs that it's value is associated with.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> >
> > I am wondering if this fix should be included in v4.3 and stable.
> > Can the problem occur in practice?
>
> I believe a lookup in one network namespace followed by write in another
> network namespace would do it. So I think it would take so pretty
> deliberate and more or less peculiar actions to make it happen.
>
> I don't know how important the update_defense_level call is or how bad
> it is if it does not run in a network namespace .
Thanks, my feeling is that this problem can be fixed via next.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists