linux-kernel - [ 15/79] ipv6: rt6_check_neigh should successfully verify neigh if no NUD information are available

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:	Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:47:05 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Pierre Emeriaud <petrus.lt@...il.com>,
	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [ 15/79] ipv6: rt6_check_neigh should successfully verify neigh if no NUD information are available

3.10-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>

[ Upstream commit 3630d40067a21d4dfbadc6002bb469ce26ac5d52 ]

After the removal of rt->n we do not create a neighbour entry at route
insertion time (rt6_bind_neighbour is gone). As long as no neighbour is
created because of "useful traffic" we skip this routing entry because
rt6_check_neigh cannot pick up a valid neighbour (neigh == NULL) and
thus returns false.

This change was introduced by commit
887c95cc1da53f66a5890fdeab13414613010097 ("ipv6: Complete neighbour
entry removal from dst_entry.")

To quote RFC4191:
"If the host has no information about the router's reachability, then
the host assumes the router is reachable."

and also:
"A host MUST NOT probe a router's reachability in the absence of useful
traffic that the host would have sent to the router if it were reachable."

So, just assume the router is reachable and let's rt6_probe do the
rest. We don't need to create a neighbour on route insertion time.

If we don't compile with CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF (RFC4191 support)
a neighbour is only valid if its nud_state is NUD_VALID. I did not find
any references that we should probe the router on route insertion time
via the other RFCs. So skip this route in that case.

v2:
a) use IS_ENABLED instead of #ifdefs (thanks to Sergei Shtylyov)

Reported-by: Pierre Emeriaud <petrus.lt@...il.com>
Cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Signed-off-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 net/ipv6/route.c |    2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

--- a/net/ipv6/route.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
@@ -547,6 +547,8 @@ static inline bool rt6_check_neigh(struc
 			ret = true;
 #endif
 		read_unlock(&neigh->lock);
+	} else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF)) {
+		ret = true;
 	}
 	rcu_read_unlock_bh();
 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/