linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xen-netfront: Fix handling packets on compound pages with skb

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]

Message-ID: <20140801110246.GB17947@zion.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Fri, 1 Aug 2014 12:02:46 +0100
From:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	<wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
	<paul.durrant@...rix.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen-netfront: Fix handling packets on compound pages
 with skb_segment

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 01:25:20PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:25:30 +0100
[...]
> Secondly, for something like UDP you can't just split the packet up
> like this, or for any other datagram protocol for that matter.
> 
> I know you're in a difficult situation, but I just can't see this
> being an acceptable approach to solving the problem right now.
> 
> Where does the MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1 limit really come from, the size of
> the TX queue?
> 

It stems from the implicit transimit protocol since inception of
netfront / netback. Sigh.

> If you were to have a 64-slot TX queue, you ought to be able to handle
> this theoretical 51 slot SKB.
> 

There's two problems:
1. IIRC a single page ring has 256 slots, allowing 64 slots packet
   yields 4 in-flight packets in worst case.
2. Older netback could not handle this large number of slots and it's
   likely to deem the frontend malicious.

For #1, we don't actually care that much if guest screws itself by
generating 64 slot packets. #2 is more concerning.

Wei.

> And I don't think it's so theoretical, a carefully crafted sequence of
> sendfile() calls during a TCP_CORK sequence should be able to do it.
> --
> 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
--
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/