netdev - ping (iputils) review (call for help)

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 3 Nov 2022 12:30:08 +0100
From:   Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>,
        Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: ping (iputils) review (call for help)

Hi,

I'm sorry to bother you about userspace. I'm preparing new iputils release and
I'm not sure about these two patches.  As there has been many regressions,
review from experts is more than welcome.

If you have time to review them, it does not matter if you post your
comments/RBT in github or here (as long as you keep Cc me so that I don't
overlook it).

BTW I wonder if it make sense to list Hideaki YOSHIFUJI as NETWORKING
IPv4/IPv6 maintainer. If I'm not mistaken, it has been a decade since he was active.

* ping: Call connect() before sending/receiving
https://github.com/iputils/iputils/pull/391
=> I did not even knew it's possible to connect to ping socket, but looks like
it works on both raw socket and on ICMP datagram socket.

* ping: revert "ping: do not bind to device when destination IP is on device
https://github.com/iputils/iputils/pull/396
=> the problem has been fixed in mainline and stable/LTS kernels therefore I
suppose we can revert cc44f4c as done in this PR. It's just a question if we
should care about people who run new iputils on older (unfixed) kernels.

Kind regards,
Petr