netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: add IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU to expose mtu value in the RA message

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, 2 Aug 2021 20:40:39 +0800
From:   Rocco Yue <rocco.yue@...iatek.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
CC:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <rocco.yue@...il.com>,
        <chao.song@...iatek.com>, <zhuoliang.zhang@...iatek.com>,
        Rocco Yue <rocco.yue@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: add IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU to expose mtu value in the RA message

On Sat, 2021-07-31 at 11:17 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
On 7/30/21 7:52 PM, Rocco Yue wrote:

> IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU set. You can set "reject_message" in the policy to
> return a message that "IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU can not be set".

Hi David,

Regarding setting "reject_message" in the policy, after reviewing
the code, I fell that it is unnecessary, because the cost of
implementing it seems to be a bit high, which requires modifying
the function interface. The reasons is as follows:

The parameter "struct netlink_ext_ack *extack" is not exposed in the
function inet6_validate_link_af(), and the last argument when calling
nla_parse_nested_deprecated() is NULL, which makes the user space not
notified even if reject_message is set.

static int inet6_validate_link_af(...)
{
...
	err = nla_parse_nested_deprecated(tb, IFLA_INET6_MAX, nla,
					  inet6_af_policy, NULL);
...
}


Only when extack is not NULL, reject_message is valid.

static int validate_nla(...)
{
...
	switch (pt->type) {
	case NLA_REJECT:
		if (extack && pt->reject_message) {
			NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(extack, nla);
			extack->_msg = pt->reject_message;
			return -EINVAL;
		}
		err = -EINVAL;
		goto out_err;
...
}


Thanks
Rocco