netdev - Re: [PATCH] Introduce a sysctl that modifies the value of PROT

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: <20170104101927.GG3009@templeofstupid.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:19:27 -0800
From:   Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce a sysctl that modifies the value of PROT_SOCK.

On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 12:55:05PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 20:11:11 -0800
> Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com> wrote:
> 
> >  
> > +config LOWPORT_SYSCTL
> > +	bool "Adjust reserved port range via sysctl"
> > +	depends on SYSCTL
> > +	help
> > +	  This allows the administrator to adjust the reserved port range
> > +	  using a sysctl.
> 
> This looks like a good idea, and makes a lot of sense.
> 
> Please don't introduce yet another config option. All distro's will enable it anyway.
> Having more config options doesn't help reliability or testability.
> 
> Do or do not, please no new config options.

I'd be happy to take it out.  It simplifies things for me.  I had
anticipated that there would be objections to permitting software to get
around the current priviliged port restrictions, and thought that
perhaps as a compromise having it be compile time option would ease some
of those concerns.

-K