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  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, 17 Jul 2020 13:34:11 -0400
From:   Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To:     Pierre Sauter <pierre.sauter@...m.de>
Cc:     Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        matthew.ruffell@...onical.com,
        linux-stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Regression] "SUNRPC: Add "@len" parameter to gss_unwrap()"
 breaks NFS Kerberos on upstream stable 5.4.y



> On Jul 17, 2020, at 1:29 PM, Pierre Sauter <pierre.sauter@...m.de> wrote:
> 
> Hi Chuck,
> 
> Am Donnerstag, 16. Juli 2020, 21:25:40 CEST schrieb Chuck Lever:
>> So this makes me think there's a possibility you are not using upstream
>> stable kernels. I can't help if I don't know what source code and commit
>> stream you are using. It also makes me question the bisect result.
> 
> Yes you are right, I was referring to Ubuntu kernels 5.4.0-XX. From the
> discussion in the Ubuntu bugtracker I got the impression that Ubuntu kernels
> 5.4.0-XX and upstream 5.4.XX are closely related, obviously they are not. The
> bisection was done by the original bug reporter and also refers to the Ubuntu
> kernel.
> 
> In the meantime I tested v5.4.51 upstream, which shows no problems. Sorry for
> the bother.

Pierre, thanks for confirming!

Kai-Heng suspected an upstream stable commit that is missing in 5.4.0-40,
but I don't have any good suggestions.


>>> My krb5 etype is aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96.
>> 
>> Thanks! And what is your NFS server and filesystem? It's possible that the
>> client is not estimating the size of the reply correctly. Variables include
>> the size of file handles, MIC verifiers, and wrap tokens.
> 
> The server is Debian with v4.19.130 upstream, filesystem ext4.
> 
>> You might try:
>> 
>> e8d70b321ecc ("SUNRPC: Fix another issue with MIC buffer space")
> 
> That one is actually in Ubuntus 5.4.0-40, from looking at the code.

--
Chuck Lever



Powered by blists - more mailing lists