netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "xfrm: interface with if

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: <CAHsH6Gtzaf2vhSv5sPpBBhBww9dy8_E7c0utoqMBORas2R+_zg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Mar 2022 15:28:56 +0200
From:   Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>
To:     kailueke@...ux.microsoft.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "xfrm: interface with if_id 0 should return error"

Hi Kai,

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:15 PM <kailueke@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> From: Kai Lueke <kailueke@...ux.microsoft.com>
>
> This reverts commit 8dce43919566f06e865f7e8949f5c10d8c2493f5 because it
> breaks userspace (e.g., Cilium is affected because it used id 0 for the
> dummy state https://github.com/cilium/cilium/pull/18789).
>
> Signed-off-by: Kai Lueke <kailueke@...ux.microsoft.com>

>From the pull request you mentioned I understand the commit which affected
Cilium userspace is 68ac0f3810e7
("xfrm: state and policy should fail if XFRMA_IF_ID 0").

Whereas 8dce43919566 ("xfrm: interface with if_id 0 should return error")
involves xfrm interfaces which don't appear in the pull request.

In which case, why should that commit be reverted?

Eyal.