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  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:	Tue, 01 Dec 2015 12:22:22 +0100
From:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] ipv6: use a random ifid for headerless devices

Hello,

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015, at 12:55, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Generating a random ifid for devices with no L2 header
> at all, allowing such devices to take part in IPv6
> autoconfiguration. The tuntap driver is one example of
> a driver where such an ifid would be useful.
> 
> Note that as there is no persistence, new addresses
> will be generated every time an interface is brought up:
> 
>  # ip -6 addr show dev tun0
>  8: tun0: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 state
>  UNKNOWN qlen 500
>      inet6 fe80::eef2:111c:f270:92ba/64 scope link
>         valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>  # ip link set tun0 down
>  # ip link set tun0 up
>  # ip -6 addr show dev tun0
>  8: tun0: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 state
>  UNKNOWN qlen 500
>      inet6 fe80::eec0:48d0:6b52:8835/64 scope link
>         valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
> ---
> I'm planning raw-ip support for the qmi_wwan driver.  And
> the feedback from primary users (ModemManager++) is that
> a headerless netdev is preferred over a fake ethernet
> device. The current plan is to model this after 'tun'
> devices, using ARPHRD_NONE as type.
> 
> But these devices will need an IPv6 link local address for
> full SLAAC support.  I am therefore wondering if an approach
> like this patch will be acceptable, or if I should look for
> some other solution?

I see no problem with the patch as it eases operating those devices. I
would also suggest storing the ifid in the inet6_dev so it does only
change during device creation and destruction. Otherwise I would
recommend to use stable privacy addresses to generate the link local
addresses. EUI-48 based LL creation should hopefully not be used anymore
soon.

Thanks,
Hannes
--
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