Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:29:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "Shaun Colley" <shaun@rsc.cx> To: "Max Laier" <max@love2party.net> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Shaun Colley <shaun@rsc.cx> Subject: Re: Unexpected behavior after altering inetsw[] switch table Message-ID: <52332.81.107.58.115.1150028941.squirrel@webmail.rsc.cx> In-Reply-To: <200606111308.28468.max@love2party.net> References: <52706.81.107.58.115.1149986191.squirrel@webmail.rsc.cx> <200606111308.28468.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Max & group, > As you can see in netinet/in_proto.c, tcp does not use pr_output, but > calls > tcp_output() directly where needed. Depending on what you want to achive > it > might be enough to hack up tcp_usr_send() and replace tcp_usrreqs.pru_send > instead. Replaceing tcp_output() is not easily possible. You could start > with telling us what you *really* want to do so we can point you to a > workable option. Right, I'll start by telling you what I'm actually trying to achieve. Everytime an IP datagram with a TCP header is sent, I want to mangle (i.e. modify) part of the TCP packet and it's payload with 'random' data. Although this may sound a bit pointless, I want to do this to implement a form of dumb fuzzing, which is a form of stress testing used a lot in computer security. Does that make a bit of sense? So I was attempting to modify the pr_output hook for TCP (which I now know isn't possible) and replace it with a ptr to my own hacked tcp_output routine. Can you see a way to do what I'm trying to achieve? Cheers, shaun
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52332.81.107.58.115.1150028941.squirrel>