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:   Fri, 21 Oct 2022 13:02:31 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 12/13] genetlink: allow families to use split
 ops directly

On Thu, 2022-10-20 at 11:09 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 09:32:17 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > Hmm. The codegen/YAML part likely won't really happen for all of the
> > families so perhaps some simplification would be good?
> > 
> > I feel like I probably should've changed this when adding
> > that's too late now :(
> > 
> > I guess we could add another set of flags, but that'd be annoying.
> Perhaps we could hang it of the .resv_start_op as well?

Yes, hopefully? Maybe?

> Any op past that would treat policy == NULL as reject all?

Right. The only danger is that someone already added new stuff somewhere
and bad/broken userspace already used it with garbage attrs.

But the chances of that are probably low.

So I'd say go for it, and worst case we bump up the resv_start_op for
anything that breaks? Wouldn't be a huge loss either.

> We'd need to add GENL_DONT_VALIDATE_DO for families which 
> want to parse inside the callbacks. I wonder if people would
> get annoyed.

Why would anyone really want to _parse_ in the callbacks?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists