netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/6] netlink: make validation more configurable for future strictness

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: <77171f971a4398ed81693060eebd9b3dee05aecd.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Fri, 12 Apr 2019 11:43:12 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] netlink: make validation more configurable for
 future strictness

On Wed, 2019-04-10 at 09:55 -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 4/3/19 11:54 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > @@ -280,6 +287,12 @@ static int validate_nla(const struct nlattr *nla, int maxtype,
> >  		break;
> >  
> >  	case NLA_UNSPEC:
> > +		if (validate & NL_VALIDATE_UNSPEC) {
> > +			NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(extack, nla,
> > +					    "Attribute not understood");
> 
> I found that confusing when I did a trial run for a new route attribute.
> How about "Unsupported attribute"?

Sure, makes sense. I've changed it in my branch (mac80211-next tree,
netlink-validation branch).

johannes