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]
Date:   Wed, 3 Oct 2018 17:16:40 +0900
From:   吉藤英明 <hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com>
To:     mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, fw@...len.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: revert degradation in IPv6 Ready Logo test results

Hi,

2018年10月3日(水) 16:57 Mike Manning <mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com>:
>
> On 02/10/2018 19:26, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Mike Manning <mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com>
> > Date: Tue,  2 Oct 2018 12:40:30 +0100
> >
> >> This reverts commit 0ed4229b08c1 ("ipv6: defrag: drop non-last frags
> >> smaller than min mtu"). While one should not get fragments smaller than
> >> the IPv6 minimum MTU, not handling crafted packets in the TAHI IPv6
> >> conformance test suite (v6eval) for IPv6 Ready Logo results in 18
> >> failures representing over 5% of the score.
> >>
> >> Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mike Manning <mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com>
> > Sorry, I'm not just going to blindly apply a patch because some
> > TAHI tests fail.
> >
> > It's possible the TAHI tests are wrong, or that the specification
> > elements it is testing don't make any sense these days.
> >
> > Allowing all kinds of random junk in the middle of the fragment queue
> > leads to lots of unnecessary cpu overhead and potential bugs, and it
> > triggerable remotely.
>
> Understood, thank you.
>
> It would be great if there is someone on this mailer who has influence
> with ipv6ready.org so as to get the TAHI tests for IPv6 conformance
> updated, as an upgrade to a kernel with the commit mentioned will result
> in a 5% degradation in results for the existing tests.
>

You can ignore some tests especially if you have some related,
updated RFC(s).

--yoshfuji

Powered by blists - more mailing lists