linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 05/31] tcp: minimize false-positives on TCP/GRO check

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: <20200114094340.570688818@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 14 Jan 2020 11:01:57 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@...ian.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 05/31] tcp: minimize false-positives on TCP/GRO check

From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>

commit 0b9aefea860063bb39e36bd7fe6c7087fed0ba87 upstream.

Markus Trippelsdorf reported that after commit dcb17d22e1c2 ("tcp: warn
on bogus MSS and try to amend it") the kernel started logging the
warning for a NIC driver that doesn't even support GRO.

It was diagnosed that it was possibly caused on connections that were
using TCP Timestamps but some packets lacked the Timestamps option. As
we reduce rcv_mss when timestamps are used, the lack of them would cause
the packets to be bigger than expected, although this is a valid case.

As this warning is more as a hint, getting a clean-cut on the
threshold is probably not worth the execution time spent on it. This
patch thus alleviates the false-positives with 2 quick checks: by
accounting for the entire TCP option space and also checking against the
interface MTU if it's available.

These changes, specially the MTU one, might mask some real positives,
though if they are really happening, it's possible that sooner or later
it will be triggered anyway.

Reported-by: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@...ian.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 net/ipv4/tcp_input.c |   14 +++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
@@ -129,7 +129,8 @@ int sysctl_tcp_invalid_ratelimit __read_
 #define REXMIT_LOST	1 /* retransmit packets marked lost */
 #define REXMIT_NEW	2 /* FRTO-style transmit of unsent/new packets */

-static void tcp_gro_dev_warn(struct sock *sk, const struct sk_buff *skb)
+static void tcp_gro_dev_warn(struct sock *sk, const struct sk_buff *skb,
+			     unsigned int len)
 {
 	static bool __once __read_mostly;

@@ -140,8 +141,9 @@ static void tcp_gro_dev_warn(struct sock

 		rcu_read_lock();
 		dev = dev_get_by_index_rcu(sock_net(sk), skb->skb_iif);
-		pr_warn("%s: Driver has suspect GRO implementation, TCP performance may be compromised.\n",
-			dev ? dev->name : "Unknown driver");
+		if (!dev || len >= dev->mtu)
+			pr_warn("%s: Driver has suspect GRO implementation, TCP performance may be compromised.\n",
+				dev ? dev->name : "Unknown driver");
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
 }
@@ -164,8 +166,10 @@ static void tcp_measure_rcv_mss(struct s
 	if (len >= icsk->icsk_ack.rcv_mss) {
 		icsk->icsk_ack.rcv_mss = min_t(unsigned int, len,
 					       tcp_sk(sk)->advmss);
-		if (unlikely(icsk->icsk_ack.rcv_mss != len))
-			tcp_gro_dev_warn(sk, skb);
+		/* Account for possibly-removed options */
+		if (unlikely(len > icsk->icsk_ack.rcv_mss +
+				   MAX_TCP_OPTION_SPACE))
+			tcp_gro_dev_warn(sk, skb, len);
 	} else {
 		/* Otherwise, we make more careful check taking into account,
 		 * that SACKs block is variable.