x25: Move to staging
Subsystems (4)
PATCH 3/3 x25: Move to staging
Recent review has revealed several bugs in obscure protocol implementations that can be exploited by local users for denial of service or privilege escalation.
The x25 protocol (PF_X25) receives only 'odd fixes'. There appear to be no published applications for it, and it has never progressed beyond 'experimental' status.
This protocol generally should not be enabled by distributions, since the cost of a security flaw affecting all installed systems presumably outweighs the benefit to the few (if any) legitimate users.
---
I'm somewhat less sure about this one; maybe it's improving? But there is little enough sign of any usefulness after 10 years.
There are several X25 dependencies that presumably should be moved too.
Ben.
drivers/staging/Kconfig | 2 ++ net/Kconfig | 1 - 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/Kconfig +2 -0
@@ -179,5 +179,7 @@ source "net/decnet/Kconfig" source "net/econet/Kconfig" +source "net/x25/Kconfig" + endif # !STAGING_EXCLUDE_BUILD endif # STAGING
net/Kconfig +0 -1
@@ -203,7 +203,6 @@ source "net/8021q/Kconfig" source "net/llc/Kconfig" source "net/ipx/Kconfig" source "drivers/net/appletalk/Kconfig" -source "net/x25/Kconfig" source "net/lapb/Kconfig" source "net/wanrouter/Kconfig" source "net/phonet/Kconfig"
Signature · 1 line
1.7.2.3
Quoted 12 lines · On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 03:55:28 +0000 Ben Hutchings <[email protected]> wrote:
Recent review has revealed several bugs in obscure protocol implementations that can be exploited by local users for denial of service or privilege escalation.
The x25 protocol (
PF_X25) receives only 'odd fixes'. There appear to be no published applications for it, and it has never progressed beyond 'experimental' status.This protocol generally should not be enabled by distributions, since the cost of a security flaw affecting all installed systems presumably outweighs the benefit to the few (if any) legitimate users.
Quoted 6 lines
Signed-off-by Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>---
I'm somewhat less sure about this one; maybe it's improving? But there is little enough sign of any usefulness after 10 years.There are several X25 dependencies that presumably should be moved too.
No. If you don't like it then don't enable it.
There are users of linux X.25 for production environments, please don't.. It works well enough, there have been some X.25 over TCP bits of code floating around the Internet and mailing lists.
There is an x25 loopback device on sourceforge using tuntap which I have been using to test slowly removing the bkls.
Regards,
Andrew.
Quoted 24 lines · Stephen Hemminger
Quoted 12 lines · On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 03:55:28 +0000 Ben Hutchings <[email protected]> wrote:
Recent review has revealed several bugs in obscure protocol implementations that can be exploited by local users for denial of service or privilege escalation.
The x25 protocol (
PF_X25) receives only 'odd fixes'. There appear to be no published applications for it, and it has never progressed beyond 'experimental' status.This protocol generally should not be enabled by distributions, since the cost of a security flaw affecting all installed systems presumably outweighs the benefit to the few (if any) legitimate users.
Quoted 6 lines
Signed-off-by Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>---
I'm somewhat less sure about this one; maybe it's improving? But there is little enough sign of any usefulness after 10 years.There are several X25 dependencies that presumably should be moved too.
No. If you don't like it then don't enable it.