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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1806051209150.13739@doshir-m01.vmware.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jun 2018 12:15:37 -0700
From:   Ronak Doshi <doshir@...are.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC:     Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
        Guolin Yang <gyang@...are.com>, Boon Ang <bang@...are.com>,
        Louis Luo <llouis@...are.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: suspicius csum initialization in vmxnet3_rx_csum



On Tue, 5 Jun 2018, Paolo Abeni wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'm sorry for the long delay in my answer, I've been travelling.
> 
> On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 11:10 -0700, Ronak Doshi wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 May 2018, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > What packet types will rcd.csum be set for?
> > > Neil 
> > 
> > I looked thorugh the emulation code and found that rcd.csum is not set. 
> > For valid v4/v6, TCP/UDP packets the code block above the mentioend "if" 
> > block will be executed or else it will go through checksum none.
> > 
> > That's why I wanted to know (in previous emails) which ESX build is being 
> > used while this was tested. The code block under "if (gdesc->rcd.csum)" 
> > block might seem incorrect but it shouldn't be hit as rcd.csum is not set. 
> 
> I'm unsure if I read the above correctly. Do you mean that the relevant
> code-path is never hit? If so, can we simply drop it, as we agreed that
> such code is uncorrect? Elsewhere, could you plese specify under which
> circumstances gdesc->rcd.csum is filled by the hypervisor?
>
I do not see hypervisor populating rcd.csum field or may be the code has 
changed over the years. So, the codepath should not be hit as it is not 
populated. I will check and fix it or remove the block if not required. 
But as far as your issue is concerned, that code block is not hit.
 
Thanks,
Ronak

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ