netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/3] netfilter: nft_fib: Mask upper DSCP bits before FIB lookup

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: <20240726133248.GA5302@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 15:32:48 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, dsahern@...nel.org, gnault@...hat.com,
	pablo@...filter.org, kadlec@...filter.org, fw@...len.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/3] netfilter: nft_fib: Mask upper DSCP
 bits before FIB lookup

Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com> wrote:
> @@ -110,7 +108,7 @@ void nft_fib4_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, struct nft_regs *regs,
>  	if (priv->flags & NFTA_FIB_F_MARK)
>  		fl4.flowi4_mark = pkt->skb->mark;
>  
> -	fl4.flowi4_tos = iph->tos & DSCP_BITS;
> +	fl4.flowi4_tos = iph->tos & IPTOS_RT_MASK;

If this is supposed to get centralised, wouldn't it
make more sense to not mask it, or will that happen later?

I thought plan was to ditch RT_MASK...