netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/4] net: bridge: add fdb flag to extent locked port feature

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: <YjNM0ugG2dcZSD2r@shredder>
Date:   Thu, 17 Mar 2022 16:59:30 +0200
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     Hans Schultz <schultz.hans@...il.com>
Cc:     razor@...ckwall.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, 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 Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 03:50:26PM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote:
> On tor, mar 17, 2022 at 15:44, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org> 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?
> >
> Is it an effort to set the flag from iproute2 on adding a fdb entry?

I'm not sure what you are asking, but even if iproute2 can't set the
flag it doesn't mean the kernel shouldn't reject it

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