From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: Netlink mmap tx security? Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:57:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20141015.195737.1429281929513331763.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20141014.220111.179628329028952302.davem@davemloft.net> <543F0712.8080503@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, kaber@trash.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, tgraf@suug.ch To: dborkman@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:55265 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750721AbaJOX5l (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:57:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <543F0712.8080503@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Daniel Borkmann Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 01:45:22 +0200 > On 10/15/2014 04:01 AM, David Miller wrote: >> From: Andy Lutomirski >> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:16:46 -0700 >> >>> It's at least remotely possible that there's something that assumes >>> that assumes that the availability of NETLINK_RX_RING implies >>> NETLINK_TX_RING, which would be unfortunate. >> >> I already found one such case, nlmon :-/ > > Hmm, can you elaborate? I currently don't think that nlmon cares > actually. nlmon cares, openvswitch cares, etc: http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2013-December/034496.html