netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] netlink: Reverse the patch which removed filtering

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

Message-ID: <20230401121212.454abf11@kernel.org>
Date:   Sat, 1 Apr 2023 12:12:12 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Anjali Kulkarni <anjali.k.kulkarni@...cle.com>
Cc:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "zbr@...emap.net" <zbr@...emap.net>,
        "brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>,
        "johannes@...solutions.net" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        "ecree.xilinx@...il.com" <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
        "leon@...nel.org" <leon@...nel.org>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "socketcan@...tkopp.net" <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
        "petrm@...dia.com" <petrm@...dia.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] netlink: Reverse the patch which removed
 filtering

On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 18:24:11 +0000 Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
> > nit: slight divergence between __u32 and u32 types, something to clean
> > up if you post v5  
>
> Thanks so much! Will do. Any comments on the connector patches?

patch 3 looks fine as far as I can read thru the ugly in place casts
patch 5 looks a bit connector specific, no idea :S
patch 6 does seem to lift the NET_ADMIN for group 0
        and from &init_user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN to net->user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN
        whether that's right or not I have no idea :(

Also, BTW, on the coding level:

+static int cn_bind(struct net *net, int group)
+{
+	unsigned long groups = 0;
+	groups = (unsigned long) group;
+
+	if (test_bit(CN_IDX_PROC - 1, &groups))

Why not just

+static int cn_bind(struct net *net, int group)
+{
+	if (group == CN_IDX_PROC)

?

Who are you hoping will merge this?