netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/5] net/ipv6: Address checks need to consider the L3 domain

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:   Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:32:59 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/5] net/ipv6: Address checks need to consider
 the L3 domain

On 3/6/18 8:01 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 01:34:03PM -0800, David Ahern wrote:
>> ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags determines if an address is a local address. It
>> is called by ip6_route_info_create to validate a gateway address is not a
>> local address. It currently does not consider L3 domains and as a result
>> does not allow a route to be added in one VRF if the nexthop points to
>> an address in a second VRF. e.g.,
>>
>>     $ ip route add 2001:db8:1::/64 vrf r2 via 2001:db8:102::23
>>     Error: Invalid gateway address.
>>
>> where 2001:db8:102::23 is an address on an interface in vrf r1.
>>
>> Resolve by comparing the l3mdev for the passed in device and requiring an
>> l3mdev match with the device containing an address. The intent of checking
>> for an address on the specified device versus any device in the domain is
>> mantained by a new argument to skip the check between the passed in device
>> and the device with the address.
>>
>> Update the handful of users of ipv6_chk_addr with a NULL dev argument:
> 
> I see at least two callers from net/sctp/ipv6.c that pass a NULL
> argument, which means they only want an address check, but you pass
> 'false' to 'skip_dev_check'.

right. I think ipv6_chk_addr should be passing dev == NULL for the
skip_dev_check. Thanks for the review