netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] netfilter: revert introduction of egress hook

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: <20200318100227.GE979@breakpoint.cc>
Date:   Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:02:27 +0100
From:   Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] netfilter: revert introduction of egress hook

Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
> This reverts the following commits:
> 
>   8537f78647c0 ("netfilter: Introduce egress hook")
>   5418d3881e1f ("netfilter: Generalize ingress hook")
>   b030f194aed2 ("netfilter: Rename ingress hook include file")
> 
> From the discussion in [0], the author's main motivation to add a hook
> in fast path is for an out of tree kernel module, which is a red flag
> to begin with.

The author did post patches for nftables, i.e. you can hook up rulesets to
this new hook point.

> is on future extensions w/o concrete code in the tree yet. Revert as
> suggested [1] given the weak justification to add more hooks to critical
> fast-path.

Do you have an alternative suggestion on how to expose this?