netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/5] gtp: Allow to create GTP device without FDs

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: <YgYmmJAuTetYH4LX@nataraja>
Date:   Fri, 11 Feb 2022 10:04:24 +0100
From:   Harald Welte <laforge@...ocom.org>
To:     "Drewek, Wojciech" <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>
Cc:     Marcin Szycik <marcin.szycik@...ux.intel.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com" 
        <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "pablo@...filter.org" <pablo@...filter.org>,
        "osmocom-net-gprs@...ts.osmocom.org" 
        <osmocom-net-gprs@...ts.osmocom.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/5] gtp: Allow to create GTP device
 without FDs

Hi Wojciech,

On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 01:30:32PM +0000, Drewek, Wojciech wrote:

> For now we don't have such tree. I will see what we can do.

I would appreciate it, so we can get this tested before it hits net-next.

> > I'm wondering if we should make this more explicit, i.e. rather than
> > implicitly creating the kernel socket automagically, make this mode
> > explicit upon request by some netlink attribute.
>
> I agree, it would look cleaner.

Excellent.

> > > Sockets are created with the
> > > commonly known UDP ports used for GTP protocol (GTP0_PORT and
> > > GTP1U_PORT).
> > 
> > I'm wondering if there are use cases that need to operate on
> > non-standard ports.  The current module can be used that way (as the
> > socket is created in user space). If the "kernel socket mode" was
> > requested explicitly via netlink attribute, one could just as well
> > pass along the port number[s] this way.
>
> Yes, it is possible to create socket with any port number using FD approach,
> but gtp module still assumes that ports are 2152 and 3386 at least in tx path
> (see gtp_push_header).  Implementing this shouldn't be hard but is it crucial?

Not crucial.

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@...ocom.org>            http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
                                                  (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)