netdev - Re: Add a SOCK_DESTROY operation to close sockets from userspace

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: <20151119.130923.186891318318651425.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:09:23 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tom@...bertland.com
Cc:	hannes@...essinduktion.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	zenczykowski@...il.com, lorenzo@...gle.com,
	stephen@...workplumber.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	edumazet@...gle.com, ek@...gle.com, dtor@...gle.com
Subject: Re: Add a SOCK_DESTROY operation to close sockets from userspace

From: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:38:37 -0800

> 1) We need transparency. If a third party kills a TCP connection then
> the application should be informed of specifically that. This seems
> easy enough to just pick an appropriate error number as I suggested.

Agreed.

> 2) We need constraints. This feature seems to be specific to a very
> narrow use case. It is not at all clear to me if there are any
> legitimate uses cases beyond Android, enabling this by default in the
> stack creates a non-zero amount of risk and liability for abuse. It
> seems like this should be an opt-in sort of feature, with a kernel
> CONFIG or maybe opt-in per socket.

And this will probably be the point of contention.
--
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