[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200318.185454.2276380590236986388.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: Jason@...c4.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/5] wireguard fixes for 5.6-rc7
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:30:42 -0600
> I originally intended to spend this cycle working on fun optimizations
> and architecture for WireGuard for 5.7, but I've been a bit neurotic
> about having 5.6 ship without any show stopper bugs. WireGuard has been
> stable for a long time now, but that doesn't make me any less nervous
> about the real deal in 5.6. To that end, I've been doing code reviews
> and having discussions, and we also had a security firm audit the code.
> That audit didn't turn up any vulnerabilities, but they did make a good
> defense-in-depth suggestion. This series contains:
>
> 1) Removal of a duplicated header, from YueHaibing.
> 2) Testing with 64-bit time in our test suite.
> 3) Account for skb->protocol==0 due to AF_PACKET sockets, suggested
> by Florian Fainelli.
> 4) Clean up some code in an unreachable switch/case branch, suggested
> by Florian Fainelli.
> 5) Better handling of low-order points, discussed with Mathias
> Hall-Andersen.
Series applied, please start providing appropriate Fixes: tags in the
future.
Thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists