netdev - Re: [PATCH/RFC net-next 0/4] net/sched: cls_flower: avoid false matching of truncated packets

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: <c88b57d8-81a5-78e5-add6-33941f912d73@mojatatu.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 May 2017 21:35:47 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Dinan Gunawardena <dinan.gunawardena@...ronome.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC net-next 0/4] net/sched: cls_flower: avoid false
 matching of truncated packets

On 17-05-01 06:36 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 09:51:30AM -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>> On 17-04-28 10:14 AM, Simon Horman wrote:

[..]

>> minimal some flag should qualify it as "truncated".
>
> Would changing TCA_FLOWER_HEADER_PARSE_ERR_ACT to
> TCA_FLOWER_META_TRUNCATED help?
>

I think so - as long as you are able to recognize the truncated
vs real 0 port/type etc.

cheers,
jamal