netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] netlink: add validation of 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]

Date:   Thu, 02 May 2019 17:07:49 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] netlink: add validation of NLA_F_NESTED
 flag

On Thu, 2019-05-02 at 15:14 +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> 
> > > @@ -415,7 +418,8 @@ enum netlink_validation {
> > >  #define NL_VALIDATE_STRICT (NL_VALIDATE_TRAILING |\
> > >  			    NL_VALIDATE_MAXTYPE |\
> > >  			    NL_VALIDATE_UNSPEC |\
> > > -			    NL_VALIDATE_STRICT_ATTRS)
> > > +			    NL_VALIDATE_STRICT_ATTRS |\
> > > +			    NL_VALIDATE_NESTED)
> > 
> > This is fine _right now_, but in general we cannot keep adding here
> > after the next release :-)
> 
> Right, that's why I would like to get this into the same cycle as your
> series.

Yeah, I know you know, just wanted state it again :-)

> How about "NLA_F_NESTED is missing" and "NLA_F_NESTED not expected"?

Looks good to me.

johannes