netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] Introduce skbmod action

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAM_iQpWNxZjWM-f_siOuXf+w_mgxKay9S8kAmUTD+8YLXp2S+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:10:15 -0700
From:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] Introduce skbmod action

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
> From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
>
> This action is intended to be an upgrade from a usability perspective
> from pedit. Compare this:
>

Definitely agree we need a more user-friendly interface.

>
> pedit is a good starting point - but once you start going to a large
> number of policies then from a programmability, ops and usability point
> of view you need something with more succint params.
>

But it is still unclear why we can't just build something on top of
pedit? Since pedit accepts keys like u32, user-space is free to
introduce any wrapper on top of it.

It should not be a problem for libnl3 to build anything on top too.