netdev - Re: [RFC] ipv6: use a random ifid for headerless devices

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: <87d1ukk9ce.fsf@nemi.mork.no>
Date:	Sat, 05 Dec 2015 20:02:09 +0100
From:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	吉藤英明 <hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ipv6: use a random ifid for headerless devices

Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015, at 20:29, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>
>> After looking more at addrconf, I started wondering if we couldn't abuse
>> ipv6_generate_stable_address() for this purpose?  We could add a new
>> addr_gen_mode which would trigger automatic generation of a secret if
>> stable_secret is uninitialized.  This would be good enough to ensure
>> stability until the interface is destroyed.  And it would still allow
>> the adminstrator to select IN6_ADDR_GEN_MODE_STABLE_PRIVACY by entering
>> a new secret.
>
> I am fine with your proposal but I would really like to see it only
> happen on the per-interface stable_secret instance.

Do you think something like the patch below will be OK?

Or would it be better to drop the additional mode and just generate a
random secret if the mode is IN6_ADDR_GEN_MODE_STABLE_PRIVACY and the
secrets are missing?  Or would that be changing the userspace ABI?  This
is not clear to me...

Bjørn


View attachment "0001-ipv6-addrconf-use-stable-address-generator-for-ARPHR.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (5929 bytes)