Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 30 Jun 2020 16:39:51 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>,
        Jonathan Rajotte-Julien <joraj@efficios.com>
Message-ID: <1682267267.17918.1593549591608.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iKUUJsEfwp2L0pwKdCP3Rx-o=6uM+1bUhT5Cc2p0p7XqA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1132973300.15954.1593459836756.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <CANn89iJ4nh6VRsMt_rh_YwC-pn=hBqsP-LD9ykeRTnDC-P5iog@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=wh=CEzD+xevqpJnOJ9w72=bEMjDNmKdovoR5GnESJBdqA@mail.gmail.com> <20200630.132112.1161418939084868350.davem@davemloft.net> <CANn89iKUUJsEfwp2L0pwKdCP3Rx-o=6uM+1bUhT5Cc2p0p7XqA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [regression] TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Topic: TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets
Thread-Index: tcdE3j+VTMeB5CSmGAl1c0l3cJ95bg==
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

----- On Jun 30, 2020, at 4:30 PM, Eric Dumazet edumazet@google.com wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:21 PM David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>>
>> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
>> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:43:21 -0700
>>
>> > If you're not willing to do the work to fix it, I will revert that
>> > commit.
>>
>> Please let me handle this situation instead of making threats, this
>> just got reported.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
> 
> Also keep in mind the commit fixed a security issue, since we were
> sending on the wire
> garbage bytes from the kernel.
> 
> We can not simply revert it and hope for the best.
> 
> I find quite alarming vendors still use TCP MD5 "for security
> reasons", but none of them have contributed to it in linux kernel
> since 2018
> (Time of the 'buggy patch')

I'm helping a customer increase their contributions and feedback to upstream.
As we can see, they have accumulated some backlog over time.

Clearly reverting a security fix is not acceptable here. Coming up with a
proper ABI-compatible fix should not be out of our reach though.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com