netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/2] ipv4: tcp: send zero IPID in SYNACK messages

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: <20220126165647.237f16e3@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
Date:   Wed, 26 Jan 2022 16:56:47 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Ray Che <xijiache@...il.com>,
        Geoff Alexander <alexandg@...unm.edu>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] ipv4: tcp: send zero IPID in SYNACK messages

On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 12:05:17 -0800 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> +		/* TCP packets here are SYNACK with fat IPv4/TCP options.
> +		 * Avoid using the hashed IP ident generator.
> +		 */
> +		if (sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP)
> +			iph->id = prandom_u32();

Is it worth marking this as (__force __be32) to avoid the false
positive sparse warning?