netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/14] udp: Farewell to UDP-Lite.

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: <20230530151401.621a8498@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2023 15:14:01 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
 dsahern@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, kuni1840@...il.com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/14] udp: Farewell to UDP-Lite.

On Tue, 30 May 2023 16:16:20 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Is it a significant burden to keep the protocol, in case anyone is
> willing to maintain it?
> 
> If consensus is that it is time to remove, a warning may not be
> sufficient for people to notice.
> 
> Perhaps break it, but in a way that can be undone trivially,
> preferably even without recompiling the kernel. Say, returning
> EOPNOTSUPP on socket creation, unless a sysctl has some magic
> non-deprecated value. But maybe I'm overthinking it. There must be
> prior art for this?

It may be the most intertwined feature we attempted to remove.
UFO was smaller, right?

Did deprecation warnings ever work? 

How about we try to push a WARN_ONCE() on socket creation to net and
stable? With a message along the lines of "UDP lite is assumed to have
no users, and is been deleted, please contact netdev@.."

Then delete the whole thing in net-next? Hopefully pushing to stable
would expedite user reports? We'll find out if Greg throws rotten fruit
at us or not..