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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220401102549.059ba70a@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:25:49 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Florent Fourcot <florent.fourcot@...irst.fr>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Brian Baboch <brian.baboch@...irst.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] rtnetlink: return ENODEV when ifname does not
 exist and group is given

On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 15:57:52 +0200 Florent Fourcot wrote:
> > 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.

Okay, fair. Please repost on Monday, tho, net-next is currently closed
(contrary to some status pages may be telling you...)