netdev - Re: Regarding UDP-Lite deprecation and removal

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: <b89274d1-e8c9-4f2c-a6ce-998129b1b699@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:49:44 +0300
From: Denis Kirjanov <dkirjanov@...e.de>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Lynne <dev@...ne.ee>,
 Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Kuniyu <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
 Willemdebruijn Kernel <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Regarding UDP-Lite deprecation and removal



On 3/18/24 13:36, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Sun, 2024-03-17 at 01:34 +0100, Lynne wrote:
>> UDP-Lite was scheduled to be removed in 2025 in commit
>> be28c14ac8bbe1ff due to a lack of real-world users, and
>> a long-outstanding security bug being left undiscovered.
>>
>> I would like to open a discussion to perhaps either avoid this,
>> or delay it, conditionally.
> 
> I'm not very familiar to the deprecation process, but I guess this kind
> of feedback is the sort of thing that could achieve delaying or avoid
> the deprecation.
> 
> What will help more IMHO is someone stepping in to actually maintain
> the protocol. It should not be an high load activity, but a few things
> would be required: e.g. writing self-tests and ensuring that 3rd party
> changes would not break it. And reviewing patches - but given the
> protocol history that would probably be once in a lifetime.

That's sounds good enough to try

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Paolo
> 
>