netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] genetlink: support per-command policy dump

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]

Date:   Fri, 2 Oct 2020 07:40:01 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
        jiri@...nulli.us, mkubecek@...e.cz, dsahern@...nel.org,
        pablo@...filter.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] genetlink: support per-command policy
 dump

On Fri, 02 Oct 2020 08:29:27 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-10-01 at 17:36 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > Do we need support for separate .doit and .dumpit policies?
> > Or is that an overkill?  
> 
> I suppose you could make an argument that only some attrs might be
> accepted in doit and somewhat others in dumpit, or perhaps none in
> dumpit because filtering wasn't implemented?

Right? Feels like it goes against our strict validation policy to
ignore input on dumpit.

> But still ... often we treat filtering as "advisory" anyway (except
> perhaps where there's no doit at all, like the dump_policy thing here),
> so it wouldn't matter if some attribute is ending up ignored?

It may be useful for feature discovery to know if an attribute is
supported.

I don't think it matters for any user right now, but maybe we should
require user space to specify if they are interested in normal req
policy or dump policy? That'd give us the ability to report different
ones in the future when the need arises.