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: Sat, 2 Dec 2023 11:34:46 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, luwei32@...wei.com, 
	fw@...len.de, maheshb@...gle.com, weiyongjun1@...wei.com, 
	yuehaibing@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net,v2] ipvlan: implement .parse_protocol hook function in ipvlan_header_ops

On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 3:14 AM shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2023/12/1 23:22, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > shaozhengchao wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2023/12/1 10:55, Zhengchao Shao wrote:
> >>> The .parse_protocol hook function in the ipvlan_header_ops structure is
> >>> not implemented. As a result, when the AF_PACKET family is used to send
> >>> packets, skb->protocol will be set to 0.
> >>> Ipvlan is a device of type ARPHRD_ETHER (ether_setup). Therefore, use
> >>> eth_header_parse_protocol function to obtain the protocol.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: 2ad7bf363841 ("ipvlan: Initial check-in of the IPVLAN driver.")
> >>
> >> Maybe Fixes should be: 75c65772c3d1 ("net/packet: Ask driver for
> >> protocol if not provided by user")
> >
> Hi Willem:
> > Definitely not anything older than the introduction of
> > header_ops.parse_protocol.
> >
>     Yes, I think so.
> > I gave my +1 when it targeted net-next, so imho this is not really
> > stable material anyhow.
>    But, if skb->protocol = 0, no matter what type of packet it is, it
> will be discarded directly in ipvlan_process_outbound().
> So net branch will be OK? What I missed?
> Thanks.

This never worked, and nobody ever claimed it has ever worked: this is
a new functionality.

net-next seems appropriate to me.

It seems that skb->protocol == 0 is only used by fuzzers, or careless
applications ?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists