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 18:02:38 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <>
To:     David Ahern <>, Michal Kubecek <>,
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <>,
        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 09:00 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> What is a valid use case for an attribute sometimes being a nest and
> sometimes not? That seems really weird to me (ie., wrong). They should
> be 2 separate attributes even if the backend processing is the same.

Yeah, well, in the mentioned case - NL80211_ATTR_VENDOR_DATA - we
basically have something that each driver (sometimes each operation that
uses it) decides what it means, and most drivers like proper netlink
attributes so have nested stuff there. Sometimes not, though in Prague
we decided we should make that documented by requiring a nested policy
and (perhaps, TBD) using something like an ERR_PTR() for "I really want
this to be binary".

I think as far as this particular attribute is concerned the ship has
sailed, but in the future I'd probably advocate having two attributes.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists