netdev - Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: allows gracefull fallback from table lookup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:17:27 +0200
From:	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Beniamino Galvani <bgalvani@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: allows gracefull fallback from table lookup

On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 15:11 +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> with the commit 8c14586fc320 ("net: ipv6: Use passed in table for
> nexthop lookups"), net hop lookup is first performed on route creation
> in the passed-in table.
> However device match is not enforced in table lookup, so the found
> route can be later discarded due to egress device mismatch and no
> global lookup will be performed.
> This cause the following to fail:
> 
> ip link add dummy1 type dummy
> ip link add dummy2 type dummy
> ip link set dummy1 up
> ip link set dummy2 up
> ip route add 2001:db8:8086::/48 dev dummy1 metric 20
> ip route add 2001:db8:d34d::/64 via 2001:db8:8086::2 dev dummy1 metric 20
> ip route add 2001:db8:8086::/48 dev dummy2 metric 21
> ip route add 2001:db8:d34d::/64 via 2001:db8:8086::2 dev dummy2 metric 21
> RTNETLINK answers: No route to host
> 
> This change fixes the issue enforcing device lookup in
> ip6_nh_lookup_table()
> 
> Fixes: 8c14586fc320 ("net: ipv6: Use passed in table for nexthop lookups")
> Reported-and-tested-by: Beniamino Galvani <bgalvani@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>

Oops, bad commit message title (not updated from a previous
implementation), I'll resubmit with a more relevant one. Sorry for the
noise.

Paolo