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  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 Aug 2020 15:35:38 +0200
From:   Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
To:     Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org>
Cc:     gluon@...beck.freifunk.net,
        Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, openwrt-devel@...ts.openwrt.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [gluon] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] bridge: Implement MLD Querier wake-up calls / Android bug workaround

Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org> writes:
> On Monday, 17 August 2020 10:39:00 CEST Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue> writes:
> [...]
>> This is not a bug.  They are deliberately breaking IPv6 because they
>> consider this a feature.  You should not try to work around such issues.
>> It is a fight you cannot win.  Any workaround will only encourage them
>> to come up with new ways to break IPv6.
>
> Who are "they" and

Google.

> where is this information coming from?

I made it up.

> And what do they gain from breaking IPv6?

Battery time.

> Wouldn't it be easier for them just to disable IPv6 
> than adding random looking bugs?

You would think so.

If it isn't clear, I am hoping to provoke them to re-classify the
"feature" as a bug and fix it.  That's what it takes to prove I am wrong.
Should be easy-peasy.



Bjørn

Powered by blists - more mailing lists