netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/6] tcp: add dropreasons in tcp_rcv_state

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: <CANn89iKEb_1kCPHjRDErmusqjGzK9w3h_tDYBxS+r-0nNHzhyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:19:37 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, 
	dsahern@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/6] tcp: add dropreasons in tcp_rcv_state_process()

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 4:53 PM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Eric,
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:33 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:29 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> >
> >
> > >                         if (!acceptable)
> > > -                               return 1;
> > > +                               /* This reason isn't clear. We can refine it in the future */
> > > +                               return SKB_DROP_REASON_TCP_CONNREQNOTACCEPTABLE;
> >
> > tcp_conn_request() might return 0 when a syncookie has been generated.
> >
> > Technically speaking, the incoming SYN was not dropped :)
> >
> > I think you need to have a patch to change tcp_conn_request() and its
> > friends to return a 'refined' drop_reason
> > to avoid future questions / patches.
>
> Thanks for your advice.
>
> Sure. That's on my to-do list since Kuniyuki pointed out[1] this
> before. I will get it started as soon as the current two patchsets are
> reviewed. For now, I think, what I wrote doesn't change the old
> behaviour, right ?
>

Lets not add a drop_reason that will soon be obsolete.