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: <20240221103330.2ae35871@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:33:30 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Boris Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>, John
 Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
 <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Vakul Garg
 <vakul.garg@....com>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 3/5] tls: don't skip over different type records
 from the rx_list

On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:59:40 +0100 Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> It's not exactly enough, since tls_record_content_type will return 0
> on a content type mismatch. We'll have to translate that into an
> "error". 

Ugh, that's unpleasant.

> I think it would be a bit nicer to set err=1 and then check
> err != 0 in tls_sw_recvmsg (we can document that in a comment above
> process_rx_list) rather than making up a fake errno. See diff [1].
> 
> Or we could swap the 0/1 returns from tls_record_content_type and
> switch the err <= 0 tests to err != 0 after the existing calls, then
> process_rx_list doesn't have a weird special case [2].
> 
> What do you think?

I missed the error = 1 case, sorry. No strong preference, then.
Checking for error = 1 will be as special as the new rx_more
flag. Should I apply this version as is, then?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ