netdev - Re: [PATCH nf-next 5/9] netfilter: conntrack: small refactoring of conntrack seq

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, 4 May 2016 00:27:36 +0200
From:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
Cc:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH nf-next 5/9] netfilter: conntrack: small refactoring of
 conntrack seq_printf

Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org> wrote:
> > -	if (NF_CT_DIRECTION(hash))
> > -		goto release;
> > -	if (nf_ct_l3num(ct) != AF_INET)
> > +	/* check if we raced w. object reuse */
> > +	if (!nf_ct_is_confirmed(ct) ||
> 
> This refactoring includes this new check, is this intentional?

Hmm, yes and no.

I should have put it in an extra commit :-/

Without this, we might erronously print a conntrack that is NEW
and which isn't confirmed yet.

We won't crash since seq_print doesn't depend on extensions being
set up properly, but it seems better to only display those conntracks
that are part of the conntrack hash table (i.e., have the confirmed bit
set).

Let me know if you want me to respin this as a separate fix, thanks!