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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 08:52:49 +0200 (CEST) From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de> To: Duncan Roe <duncan_roe@...usnet.com.au> cc: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Cole Dishington <Cole.Dishington@...iedtelesis.co.nz>, pablo@...filter.org, kadlec@...filter.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Anthony Lineham <anthony.lineham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>, Scott Parlane <scott.parlane@...iedtelesis.co.nz>, Blair Steven <blair.steven@...iedtelesis.co.nz> Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: netfilter: Fix port selection of FTP for NF_NAT_RANGE_PROTO_SPECIFIED On Wednesday 2021-09-08 04:22, Duncan Roe wrote: >> >Either use if (nat->range_info.min_proto.all || ... >> > >> >or use ntohs(). I will leave it up to you if you prefer >> >ntohs(nat->range_info.min_proto.all) == 0 or >> >nat->range_info.min_proto.all == ntohs(0). >> >> If one has the option, one should always prefer to put htons/htonl on >> the side with the constant literal; >> Propagation of constants and compile-time evaluation is the target. >> >> That works for some other functions as well (e.g. >> strlen("fixedstring")). > >When comparing against constant zero, why use htons/htonl at all? Logical correctness. Remember, it was the sparse tool that complained in the first place.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists