netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: extend drop reasons for multiple subsystems

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: <20230330103726.02aa8ae0@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 30 Mar 2023 10:37:26 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: extend drop reasons for multiple
 subsystems

On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 10:11:12 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> Yeah, I was being a bit sneaky here ;)
> 
> We could, for sure. Given that the users should probably be defensively
> coded anyway (as I did in drop_monitor), I wasn't sure if we _should_.
> 
> It seemed to me that for experimentation, especially if your driver is a
> module, it might be easier to allow this?
> 
> That said, I don't have any strong feelings about it, and I have some
> bugs here anyway so I can just add that.
> 
> We _could_ also keep a check for the core subsystem, but not sure that's
> worth it?

Checking the top bits should be good enough to catch uninitialized
values, and discourage out-of-tree shenanigans, I'd hope.