netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] make nla_nest_start() add NLA_F

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: <18db9ac8b398b215e3523dd5b79c7f86e21864ce.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Fri, 26 Apr 2019 14:17:42 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        "netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
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
it?

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

johannes