netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments

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:	Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:06:38 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Alex Bergmann <alex@...lab.net>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>,
	Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
	Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments

On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 01:29 +0200, Alex Bergmann wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> I'm not 100% sure, but it looks like I found an RFC mismatch with the 
> current default values of the TCP implementation.
> 
> Alex
> 
> From 8b854a525eb45f64ad29dfab16f9d9f681e84495 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Alexander Bergmann <alex@...lab.net>
> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:29:08 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments
> 
> Commit 9ad7c049 changed the initRTO from 3secs to 1sec in accordance to
> RFC6298 (former RFC2988bis). This introduced a gap with RFC1122 that
> defines a minimum retransmission window for SYN segments of at least
> 180secs.
> 
> Prior to 9ad7c049 the timeout was defined with 189secs. Now we have only
> a timeout of 63secs.
> 
>         ((2 << 5) - 1) * 3 secs = 189 secs
>         ((2 << 5) - 1) * 1 secs = 63 secs

Strange maths ... here I have :

(1+2+4+8+16) * 3 = 93 secs
vs
(1+2+4+8+16) * 1 = 31 secs

So even before said commit, we were not rfc1122 compliant.

Using 7 retries would give 127 seconds, still not rfc compliant.

> 
> To fulfill the MUST constraint in RFC1122 section 4.2.3.5 about R2 for
> SYN segments, the values of TCP_SYN_RETRIES and TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES must
> be changed to 7 reties.
> 
>         ((2 << 7) - 1) * 1 secs = 255 secs
> 
> This would result in an ETIMEDOUT of 4 minutes 15 seconds.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Bergmann <alex@...lab.net>
> ---
>  include/net/tcp.h |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/net/tcp.h b/include/net/tcp.h
> index 1f000ff..7eaae19 100644
> --- a/include/net/tcp.h
> +++ b/include/net/tcp.h
> @@ -98,10 +98,10 @@ extern void tcp_time_wait(struct sock *sk, int state, int timeo);
>                                  * 15 is ~13-30min depending on RTO.
>                                  */
>  
> -#define TCP_SYN_RETRIES         5      /* number of times to retry active opening a
> +#define TCP_SYN_RETRIES         7      /* number of times to retry active opening a
>                                  * connection: ~180sec is RFC minimum   */
>  
> -#define TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES 5   /* number of times to retry passive opening a
> +#define TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES 7   /* number of times to retry passive opening a
>                                  * connection: ~180sec is RFC minimum   */
>  
>  #define TCP_TIMEWAIT_LEN (60*HZ) /* how long to wait to destroy TIME-WAIT

Nice catch !

I kind of disagree with the SYNACK part.

RFC 1122 says in 4.2.3.5 :

  However, the values of R1 and R2 may be different for SYN
  and data segments.  In particular, R2 for a SYN segment MUST
  be set large enough to provide retransmission of the segment
  for at least 3 minutes.  The application can close the
  connection (i.e., give up on the open attempt) sooner, of
  course.

I am not sure SYNACK segments were considered as a 'SYN segment' in this
section. (as the application cannot 'close' the connection on the passive
side, only kernel is aware of a SYN_RECV socket)

Increasing TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES from 5 to 7 or 8 amplifies the
SYN/synflood problem.

A valid client should retransmit its SYN packet for 180 seconds, I dont
believe we should make sure the SYNACK will be sent for 180 seconds as
well.

If we _really_ want to have a 3 minutes R2 for SYNACK, I suggest
changing things to that we dont send more than 5 SYNACKS, maybe using
RTO=6 after one retransmit

current situation :
1 sec
2 sec
4 sec
8 sec
16 sec
----
total of 31 seconds


1 sec
12 sec  // switch to RTO = 6
24 sec
48 sec
96 sec
-----
total of 181 seconds



--
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