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 14:22:16 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <>
        Florian Fainelli <>,
        Andrew Lunn <>,
        Vivien Didelot <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>,
        Paolo Abeni <>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <>,
        Woojung Huh <>,, Sean Wang <>,
        Landen Chao <>,
        DENG Qingfang <>,
        Matthias Brugger <>,
        Claudiu Manoil <>,
        Alexandre Belloni <>,
        Jiri Pirko <>,
        Ivan Vecera <>,
        Roopa Prabhu <>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <>,
        Shuah Khan <>,
        Russell King <>,
        Christian Marangi <>,
        Daniel Borkmann <>,
        Yuwei Wang <>,
        Petr Machata <>,
        Ido Schimmel <>,
        Florent Fourcot <>,
        Hans Schultz <>,
        Joachim Wiberg <>,
        Amit Cohen <>,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 10/12] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: mac-auth/MAB

On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 08:47:42AM +0200, wrote:
> On 2022-10-21 00:57, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 10:20:50PM +0200,
> > wrote:
> > > In general locked ports block traffic from a host based on if there
> > > is a
> > > FDB entry or not. In the non-offloaded case, there is only CPU
> > > assisted
> > > learning, so the normal learning mechanism has to be disabled as any
> > > learned entry will open the port for the learned MAC,vlan.
> > 
> > Does it have to be that way? Why can't BR_LEARNING on a BR_PORT_LOCKED
> > cause the learned FDB entries to have BR_FDB_LOCKED, and everything
> > would be ok in that case (the port will not be opened for the learned
> > MAC/VLAN)?
> I suppose you are right that basing it solely on BR_FDB_LOCKED is possible.
> The question is then maybe if the common case where you don't need learned
> entries for the scheme to work, e.g. with EAPOL link local packets, requires
> less CPU load to work and is cleaner than if using BR_FDB_LOCKED entries?

I suppose the real question is what does the bridge currently do with
BR_LEARNING + BR_PORT_LOCKED, and if that is sane and useful in any case?
It isn't a configuration that's rejected, for sure. The configuration
could be rejected via a bug fix patch, then in net-next it could be made
to learn these addresses with the BR_FDB_LOCKED flag.

To your question regarding the common case (no MAB): that can be supported
just fine when BR_LEARNING is off and BR_PORT_LOCKED is on, no?
No BR_FDB_LOCKED entries will be learned.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists