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]
Date:   Thu, 17 Mar 2022 15:54:43 +0200
From:   Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
        Hans Schultz <schultz.hans@...il.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Hans Schultz <schultz.hans+netdev@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/4] net: bridge: add fdb flag to extent
 locked port feature

On 17/03/2022 15:44, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 10:38:59AM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote:
>> Add an intermediate state for clients behind a locked port to allow for
>> possible opening of the port for said clients. This feature corresponds
>> to the Mac-Auth and MAC Authentication Bypass (MAB) named features. The
>> latter defined by Cisco.
>> Only the kernel can set this FDB entry flag, while userspace can read
>> the flag and remove it by deleting the FDB entry.
> 
> Can you explain where this flag is rejected by the kernel?
> 
> Nik, it seems the bridge ignores 'NDA_FLAGS_EXT', but I think that for
> new flags we should do a better job and reject unsupported
> configurations. WDYT?
> 

Definitely, I agree.

> The neighbour code will correctly reject the new flag due to
> 'NTF_EXT_MASK'.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ