Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266352AbUIIVdr (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:33:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267312AbUIIVbU (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:31:20 -0400 Received: from open.hands.com ([195.224.53.39]:989 "EHLO open.hands.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268000AbUIIV06 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:26:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:38:13 +0100 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton To: Chris Wright Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] update: _working_ code to add device+inode check to ipt_owner.c Message-ID: <20040909213813.GC10892@lkcl.net> References: <20040909162200.GB9456@lkcl.net> <20040909091931.K1973@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20040909181034.GF10046@lkcl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040909181034.GF10046@lkcl.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-hands-com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-hands-com-MailScanner-SpamScore: s X-MailScanner-From: lkcl@lkcl.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1483 Lines: 42 On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 07:10:34PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:19:31AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > > * Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (lkcl@lkcl.net) wrote: > > > wow, gosh, it works. > > > > > > okay, this is a patch to add support in iptables for per-program > > > firewall filtering. > > > > > > also included is the patches to iptables-1.2.11. > > > > > > i have confidence that this patch will provide support for > > > BOTH incoming AND outgoing per-program packet filtering. > > > > Programs can share a socket. Incoming is in interrupt context. You > > have no idea who will be woken up. How do you handle this? > > chris, hi, chris - for example, i notice that at the top of ipt_owner.c it says "deals with local outgoing sockets". so... does sk_buff _only_ contain a list of outgoing sockets? iiiisss... there a different socket for incoming traffic that someone is different from the list of sockets associated with a task? is the clue in what you say about "Incoming is in interrupt context"? are the sockets in the interrupt context somehow different / special such that they would never get to this code? gloop, gloop, i'm drowning in lack of knowledge, here. l. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/