netdev - RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Change in behavior for bound vs unbound sockets

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: <BL0PR2101MB1316DCC9FFC2B0BBA9F66815D9CE9@BL0PR2101MB1316.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Sep 2021 00:16:31 +0000
From:   Saikrishna Arcot <sarcot@...rosoft.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>,
        Mike Manning <mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Change in behavior for bound vs unbound sockets


>On 8/31/21 7:29 PM, Paul Menzel wrote:
>>> Is the intention of those commits also meant to affect sockets that
>>> are bound to just regular interfaces (and not only VRFs)? If so,
>>> since this change breaks a userspace application, is it possible to
>>> add a config that reverts to the old behavior, where bound sockets
>>> are preferred over unbound sockets?
>> If it breaks user space, the old behavior needs to be restored
>> according to Linux' no regression policy. Let's hope, in the future,
>> there is better testing infrastructure and such issues are noticed earlier.
>
>5.0 was 2-1/2 years ago.

Does that mean that this should be considered the new behavior? Is it
possible to at least add a sysctl config to use the older behavior for
non-VRF socket bindings?

>
>Feel free to add tests to tools/testing/selftests/net/fcnal-test.sh to cover any
>missing permutations, including what you believe is the problem here. Both IPv4
>and IPv6 should be added for consistency across protocols.
>
>nettest.c has a lot of the networking APIs, supports udp, tcp, raw, ...

Let me try to add a test case there. I'm guessing test cases added there
should pass with the current version of the kernel (i.e. should reflect the
current behavior)?

-- 
Saikrishna Arcot