netdev - Re: [PATCH net v4 2/8] ipv4: Honour NLM_F_MATCH, make semantics of NETLINK_GET_STRICT

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:   Mon, 17 Jun 2019 07:29:15 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Jianlin Shi <jishi@...hat.com>, Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4 2/8] ipv4: Honour NLM_F_MATCH, make semantics of
 NETLINK_GET_STRICT_CHK consistent

On 6/14/19 9:23 PM, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> 
> 1. we need a way to filter on cached routes
> 
> 2. RTM_F_CLONED, by itself, doesn't specify a filter
> 
> 3. how do we turn that into a filter? NLM_F_MATCH, says RFC 3549
> 
> 4. but if strict checking is requested, you also turn some attributes
>    and flags into filters -- so let's make that apply to RTM_F_CLONED
>    too, I don't see any reason why that should be special
> 

I guess I am arguing (and Martin seems to agree with end goal) that
RTM_F_CLONED is special. There are really 2 "databases" to be dumped
here: FIB entries and exceptions. Which one to dump is controlled by
RTM_F_CLONED.