netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] rtnetlink: return ENODEV when ifname does not exist and group is given

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: <ba682166-956f-1eb7-1180-04b903234752@wifirst.fr>
Date:   Fri, 1 Apr 2022 15:57:52 +0200
From:   Florent Fourcot <florent.fourcot@...irst.fr>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Brian Baboch <brian.baboch@...irst.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] rtnetlink: return ENODEV when ifname does not
 exist and group is given

Hello,

> Please run the patches thru ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl.
> netdev is high volume (and Gmail hates it), we really need people 
> to CC potential reviewers.

Sorry for that. I was unable to choose relevant reviewers in 
get_maintainer output (too few or too many lines). I will add CC in next 
post.

> 
> Would it be slightly cleaner to have a similar check in
> validate_linkmsg()? Something like:
> 
> 	if (!dev && !ifm->ifi_index && tb[IFLA_GROUP] &&
> 	    (tb[IFLA_IFNAME] || tb[IFLA_ALT_IFNAME]))

That will add some complexity in validate_linkmsg, since we will need to 
check NLM_F_CREATE flag before (it's probably not an error when 
NLM_F_CREATE is set), and to give ifm as argument to check ifi_index.

I do not have a strong opinion on this topic, and if you think your idea 
is a better solution I can give a try in a v2.

Thanks,

-- 
Florent Fourcot