On Tue, 2015-04-28 at 14:01 -0600, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:51:51PM -0600, Chas Williams III wrote:
> > Upstream commit 6fd99094de2b83d1d4c8457f2c83483b2828e75a
> >
> > From: "D.S. Ljungmark" <[email protected]>
> >
> > A local route may have a lower hop_limit set than global routes do.
> >
> > RFC 3756, Section 4.2.7, "Parameter Spoofing"
> >
> > > 1. The attacker includes a Current Hop Limit of one or another small
> > > number which the attacker knows will cause legitimate packets to
> > > be dropped before they reach their destination.
> >
> > > As an example, one possible approach to mitigate this threat is to
> > > ignore very small hop limits. The nodes could implement a
> > > configurable minimum hop limit, and ignore attempts to set it below
> > > said limit.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: D.S. Ljungmark <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > net/ipv6/ndisc.c | 9 ++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Why have you sent this, when your name isn't on the commit at all?
>
> What do you want done with this?
>
> Have you read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt?
>
> confused,
>
> greg k-h
I didn't write the patch so my name isn't on it but I would like it
applied to the 3.14.y stable kernel. I was trying to follow Option #2
from the documentation -- I guess I didn't get it right.
N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+������z)����w* jg��� �����ݢj/���z�ޖ��2�ޙ����&�)ߡ�a���� �G���h��j:+v���w��٥
