netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next v7 0/6] bpf: Force to MPTCP

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]

Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2023 10:03:12 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Geliang Tang
	 <geliang.tang@...e.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann
 <daniel@...earbox.net>,  Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai
 Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,  Yonghong Song
 <yhs@...com>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, KP Singh
 <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo
 <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Florent Revest
 <revest@...omium.org>, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...omium.org>, Matthieu
 Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>, Mat Martineau
 <martineau@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric
 Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,  John
 Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
 James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,  "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
 Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>, Eric Paris
 <eparis@...isplace.org>, Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@...com>, Shuah Khan
 <shuah@...nel.org>,  bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 mptcp@...ts.linux.dev,  apparmor@...ts.ubuntu.com,
 linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,  selinux@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v7 0/6] bpf: Force to MPTCP

On Mon, 2023-07-31 at 17:43 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:

> I still think it's a hack, but its blast radius is nicely contained.
> And since I cannot propose any better I'm ok with it.
> 
> Patches 1-2 can be squashed into one.
> Just like patches 3-6 as a single patch for selftests.
> 
> But before proceeding I'd like an explicit ack from netdev maintainers.

Just to state the obvious, I carry my personal bias on this topic due
to my background ;)

My perspective is quite similar to Alexei's one: the solution is not
extremely elegant, but is very self-contained; it looks viable to me.

WRT the specific code, I think the additional checks on the 'protocol'
value after the 'update_socket_protocol()' call should be dropped: the
user space can already provide an arbitrary value there and the later
code deal with that.

Cheers,

Paolo