netdev - WARNING: iputils is not very fresh, upgrade is recommended; bug in iputils or kernel?

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <560C8262.6030405@tlinx.org>
Date:	Wed, 30 Sep 2015 17:46:26 -0700
From:	"L. A. Walsh" <lkml@...nx.org>
To:	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: WARNING: iputils is not very fresh, upgrade is recommended; bug in
 iputils or kernel?

According to the comment in the code:
---
            /* Sigh, IP_RECVERR for raw socket
             * was broken until 2.4.9. So, we ignore
             * the first error and warn on the second.
             */
            if (once++ == 1)
              fprintf(stderr, "\rWARNING: kernel is not very fresh, 
upgrade is recommended.\n");

----
When I first saw the error I wondered how fresh my kernel had
to be to pass iputils' tests, since I'm running on:

Ishtar:packages/build/iputils-s20121221> uname -a
Linux Ishtar 4.1.0-Isht-Van #2 SMP PREEMPT Tue Jun 23 07:52:09 PDT 2015 
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

So I looked at code  Um... why is iputils thinking
that 4.1.0 < 2.4.9 -- or that 4.1.0 is older than
2.4.9?

I humbly submit that 4.1.0, released in 2015 is
unquestionably 'fresher' than the date on iputils of 2012.

Does this mean the check in iputils is faulty w/r/t new
kernels, or do new kernels have a *SERIOUS* regression?

--
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