netdev - RE: [PATCHv4 net-next 16/16] sctp: enable udp tunneling socks

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: <d36e186fd50c44a29adb07f16242f3fd@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:47:05 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Xin Long' <lucien.xin@...il.com>,
        Michael Tuexen <tuexen@...muenster.de>
CC:     Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
        network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org>,
        Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
        davem <davem@...emloft.net>, Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCHv4 net-next 16/16] sctp: enable udp tunneling socks

From: Xin Long
> Sent: 22 October 2020 04:13
...
> I was thinking that by leaving it to 9899 by default users don't need to
> know the port when want to use it, and yet I didn't want to add another
> sysctl member. :D

Could you make 1 mean 9899?
So:
  0 => disabled
  1 => default port
  n => use port n
I doubt that disallowing port 1 is a problem!

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)