netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] netfilter: Add possibility to turn off netfilters defrag per netns

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:18:59 +0100
From:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>
Cc:	Hans Schillstrom <hans.schillstrom@...csson.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] netfilter: Add possibility to turn off netfilters
 defrag per netns

On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:11:28AM +0100, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
> OK, I see. Conntrack is per net namespace but it's enabled globally.
>  
> So at the moment I think the best solution is something like your patch 
> variant (but the condition is wrong, it should be "&& !skb->nfct"):
> 
> --- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_defrag_ipv4.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_defrag_ipv4.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,14 @@ static unsigned int ipv4_conntrack_defrag(unsigned int
> hooknum,
> ...
> +       const struct net_device *dev = (hooknum == NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT ?
> +                                       out : in);
> +
> +       /* No defrag and not Previously seen (loopback)? */
> +       if (dev_net(dev)->ct.sysctl_notrac_defrag && skb->nfct) {
> +               /* Attach fake conntrack entry. as in NOTRACK */
> +               skb->nfct = &nf_ct_untracked_get()->ct_general;
> +               skb->nfctinfo = IP_CT_NEW;
> +               nf_conntrack_get(skb->nfct);
> +               return NF_ACCEPT;
> +       }
> ...

I prefer the sysctl option as well, the new table is too much and it
remains too specific for this.

I wonder if we can conditionally register the sysctl only if we are
inside one lxc container.

I'm telling this because this sysctl does not seem to make any sense
to me outside of it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html