netdev - Re: [PATCH] bonding: do not enslave CAN devices

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]

Message-ID: <d69b4a32-5d3e-d100-78d3-d713b97eb2ff@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Mon, 9 Mar 2020 11:25:50 +0100
From:   Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     socketcan@...tkopp.net, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+c3ea30e1e2485573f953@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        dvyukov@...gle.com, j.vosburgh@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com,
        andy@...yhouse.net, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: do not enslave CAN devices

On 3/7/20 6:13 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 15:12:48 +0100
> 
>> On 3/2/20 8:12 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
>>> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 09:45:41 +0100
>>>
>>>> I don't know yet whether it makes sense to have CAN bonding/team
>>>> devices. But if so we would need some more investigation. For now
>>>> disabling CAN interfaces for bonding/team devices seems to be
>>>> reasonable.
>>>
>>> Every single interesting device that falls into a special use case
>>> like CAN is going to be tempted to add a similar check.
>>>
>>> I don't want to set this precedence.
>>>
>>> Check that the devices you get passed are actually CAN devices, it's
>>> easy, just compare the netdev_ops and make sure they equal the CAN
>>> ones.
>>
>> Sorry, I'm not really sure how to implement this check.
> 
> Like this:
> 
> if (netdev->ops != &can_netdev_ops)
> 	return;

There is no single can_netdev_ops. The netdev_ops are per CAN-network
driver. But the ml_priv is used in the generic CAN code.

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |