netdev - Re: [PATCH ipsec] xfrm: Preserve xfrm interface secpath for packets forwarded

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <507dac097ddd5b906de363319c46000c91041b36.camel@strongswan.org>
Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2023 10:24:51 +0200
From:   Martin Willi <martin@...ongswan.org>
To:     Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>
Cc:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Benedict Wong <benedictwong@...gle.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec] xfrm: Preserve xfrm interface secpath for packets
 forwarded

Hi Eyal,

> > The benefit I think is in not deducing whether we are in
> > forwarding.
> 
> After another look the secpath is reset in that case anyway.
> So in that case, which flow is missing when just using:
> 
> if (if_id && dir != XFRM_POLICY_FWD)
>     secpath_reset(skb);

This is obviously the better and simpler approach, and it works just
fine in my testing. I'll post a v2.

Thanks,
Martin