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]
Date:   Fri, 26 Apr 2019 14:17:42 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <>
To:     Michal Kubecek <>,
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <>,
        David Ahern <>,
        Jiri Pirko <>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <>,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <>,
        Florian Westphal <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] make nla_nest_start() add NLA_F_NESTED flag

On Fri, 2019-04-26 at 13:56 +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:

> > > I suppose we should, at least the part that attribute with NLA_NESTED
> > > policy has NLA_F_NESTED flag. I'm not so sure about the opposite (i.e.
> > > that attributes with other policies do not have the flag) as when I was
> > > checking where kernel accesses nlattr::nla_type directly rather than
> > > with nla_type(), I stumbled upon an attribute NL80211_ATTR_VENDOR_DATA
> > > which has policy NLA_BINARY but is sometimes a nest, AFAICS.
> > 
> > I guess anyway we can only do it for *new* things, not really for all
> > existing attributes.
> Right... but what I wanted to say is that if there is already (at least)
> one attribute which may or may not be a nest, depending on a context, we
> should expect there may be also new attributes like that in the future.

Yeah, but we can handle that as we see it?

I just reposted my strict validation series - maybe we can right now, as
it's not released yet, quickly add an NL_VALIDATED_NESTED_FLAG or so to

Do you want to take a stab at that? I have to go now, but I could check
in the next few days.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists