netdev - Re: [PATCH] netfilter: don't permit unprivileged writes to global state via sysctls

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

Message-Id: <20161022.184316.791487930434404648.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:43:16 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     jann@...jh.net
Cc:     pablo@...filter.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org,
        yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: don't permit unprivileged writes to global
 state via sysctls

From: Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 23:23:42 +0200

> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 02:37:47PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
>> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:22:24 +0200
>> 
>> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 12:21:04AM +0200, Jann Horn wrote:
>> >> This prevents the modification of nf_conntrack_max in unprivileged network
>> >> namespaces. For unprivileged network namespaces, ip_conntrack_max is kept
>> >> as a readonly sysctl in order to minimize potential compatibility issues.
>> >> 
>> >> This patch should apply cleanly to the net tree.
>> > 
>> > For the record: This patch looks good to me, but this legacy
>> > ip_conntrack sysctl code is now gone.
>> > 
>> > I don't know what is the procedure to get this to -stable branches now
>> > that this cannot be pushed upstream.
>> 
>> In the commit message for the -stable submission simply say "Not
>> applicable" in the upstream commit reference.  Like:
>> 
>> 	[ Upstream commit: Not applicable ]
>> 
>> or something like that.
> 
> Who should do that? Me, after getting a maintainer ack? Or the maintainer?

When the maintainer submits a patch to -stable, that's what they
add to the commit message.