netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] security: add const qualifier to struct sock in various places

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201203142409.3bbc068f@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:24:09 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc:     Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, mptcp@...ts.01.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] security: add const qualifier to struct
 sock in various places

On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 04:07:16 +1100 (AEDT) James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:36:29 +0100 Florian Westphal wrote:  
> > > A followup change to tcp_request_sock_op would have to drop the 'const'
> > > qualifier from the 'route_req' function as the
> > > 'security_inet_conn_request' call is moved there - and that function
> > > expects a 'struct sock *'.
> > > 
> > > However, it turns out its also possible to add a const qualifier to
> > > security_inet_conn_request instead.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
> > > ---
> > >  The code churn is unfortunate.  Alternative would be to change
> > >  the function signature of ->route_req:
> > >  struct dst_entry *(*route_req)(struct sock *sk, ...
> > >  [ i.e., drop 'const' ].  Thoughts?  
> > 
> > Security folks - is this okay to merge into net-next?
> > 
> > We can put it on a branch and pull into both trees if the risk 
> > of conflicts is high.  
> 
> Acked-by: James Morris <jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com>

Thank you!

Into net-next it goes..