Re: [PATCH 2.6]: ip6t_{hbh,dst}: Rejects not-strict mode on rule insersion

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

Yasuyuki KOZAKAI wrote:
> From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:54:00 +0200
> 
>> Yasuyuki KOZAKAI wrote:
>>> Hi Patrick,
>>>
>>> Please apply the following patch. The option IP6T_OPTS_NSTRICT causes to
>>> ignore rules for options in HBH/DST header.
>>>
>>> I think this issue affects few users. Because fortunately (?) man page and
>>> 'ip6tables -m hbh --help' does not show --hbh-not-strict option, and
>>> 'ip6tables ... --hbh-not-strict' does not work due to incorrect has_arg
>>> value in userland libip6t_hbh.c ;)
>>>
>>> I will implement not-strict mode, so the patch leaves the definition of
>>> IP6T_OPTS_NSTRICT. The strict mode is too strict (the specified options
>>> have to be included in order in HBH/DST header) and would be useless
>>> in most senarios.
>> Since my knowledge of this quite limited - is this fix important
>> enough so it should go in 2.6.27, or is queuing it for 2.6.28 OK
>> too?
> 
> Actually I am torn between them. I think this is security issue, like that
> 'iptables -p tcp -j DROP' does not drop TCP packets.
> But no ip6tables user meet this issue because of has_arg bug.
> 
> I prefer 2.6.27 so that I don't need to fear rare case in several months :)

Applied, thanks, and sorry for the delay.