netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: introduce ip_local_unbindable

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20191219.095208.349922153806345978.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Thu, 19 Dec 2019 09:52:08 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     lorenzo@...gle.com
Cc:     nhorman@...driver.com, zenczykowski@...il.com, maze@...gle.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, stranche@...eaurora.org,
        subashab@...eaurora.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: introduce ip_local_unbindable_ports sysctl

From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 23:02:32 +0900

> But in any case, the result would be more complicated to use and
> maintain, and it would likely also be less realistic, such that a
> sophisticated conformance test might still find that the port was
> actually bound. Other users of the kernel wouldn't get to use this
> sysctl, and the userspace code can't be easily reused in other
> open-source projects, so the community gets nothing useful. That
> doesn't seem great.

The same argument can be made about kernel changes that are only
needed by Android because they refuse to use a userspace solution that
frankly can do the job.

Can you see why these Android special case discussions are so
frustrating for kernel devs?

And using the "we'll just have a local kernel change in the Android
kernel" threat as leverage in the discussion... yeah very unpleasant
indeed.