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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 10:47:56 +0200 From: Kristian Evensen <kristian.evensen@...il.com> To: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com> Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>, Netfilter Development Mailing list <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/31] netfilter: ctnetlink: Support L3 protocol-filter on flush Hello, On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:07 PM Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com> wrote: > Since this patch, there is a regression with 'conntrack -F', it does not flush > anymore ipv6 conntrack entries. > In fact, the conntrack tool set by default the family to AF_INET and forbid to > set the family to something else (the '-f' option is not allowed for the command > 'flush'). I am very sorry for my late reply and for the trouble my change has caused. However, I am not sure if I agree that it triggers a regression. Had conntrack for example not set any family and my change caused only IPv4 entries to be flushed, then I agree it would have been a regression. If you ask me, what my change has exposed is incorrect API usage in conntrack. One could argue that since conntrack explicitly sets the family to AF_INET, the fact that IPv6 entries also has been flushed has been incorrect. However, if the general consensus is that this is a regression, I am more than willing to help in finding a solution (if I have anything to contribute :)). BR, Kristian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists