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: <c19db1bf-eacd-32d5-4db6-1693715378b6@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 May 2017 14:38:16 -0700
From:   Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys@...hat.com>
To:     Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] arp: decompose is_garp logic into a separate
 function

On 05/18/2017 01:49 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:

> 	All 4 patches look ok to me with only a small problem
> which comes from patch already included in kernel. I see
> that GARP replies can not work for 1394, is_garp will be
> cleared. May be 'tha' check should be moved in if expression,
> for example:
>
> 	if (is_garp && ar_op == htons(ARPOP_REPLY) && tha)
> 		is_garp = !memcmp(tha, sha, dev->addr_len);

I can easily miss something substantial, so please correct me, but...

If it's of REPLY type, the RFC 2002 requires that target hardware 
address field equals to source address field for a packet to be 
considered gratuitous. Since IEEE 1394 ARP standard defines its payload 
without target field, it seems to me that there is no such thing as a 
gratuitous ARP reply for IEEE 1394. That's why I think resetting is_garp 
to 0 for those packets is justified.

Ihar

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ