linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] nvme-fc: do not retry when auth fails or connection is refused

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 18:02:09 +0100
From: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
Cc: James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>, 
	Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, 
	linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] nvme-fc: do not retry when auth fails or
 connection is refused

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 08:45:04AM +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 07:46:12AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > On 2/21/24 17:37, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 04:53:44PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > > In this case yes, I've tested on top of this patch. This breaks the loop
> > > where the provided key is invalid or is missing. The loop would happy
> > > retry until reaching max of retries.
> > 
> > But that's to be expected, no?
> 
> Why? If the key is wrong/missing it will be likely wrong/missing the
> next retry again. So what's the point in retrying?
> 
> > After all, that's _precisely_ what
> > NVME_SC_DNR is for;
> > if you shouldn't retry, that bit is set.
> > If it's not set, you should.
> 
> Okay, in this case there is a bug in the auth code somewhere.

With the change below nvme/041 also passes:

modified   drivers/nvme/host/fabrics.c
@@ -467,7 +467,7 @@ int nvmf_connect_admin_queue(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl)
 		if (result & NVME_CONNECT_AUTHREQ_ASCR) {
 			dev_warn(ctrl->device,
 				 "qid 0: secure concatenation is not supported\n");
-			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED;
+			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED | NVME_SC_DNR;
 			goto out_free_data;
 		}
 		/* Authentication required */
@@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ int nvmf_connect_admin_queue(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl)
 		if (ret) {
 			dev_warn(ctrl->device,
 				 "qid 0: authentication setup failed\n");
-			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED;
+			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED | NVME_SC_DNR;
 			goto out_free_data;
 		}
 		ret = nvme_auth_wait(ctrl, 0);
@@ -540,8 +540,9 @@ int nvmf_connect_io_queue(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl, u16 qid)
 		/* Secure concatenation is not implemented */
 		if (result & NVME_CONNECT_AUTHREQ_ASCR) {
 			dev_warn(ctrl->device,
-				 "qid 0: secure concatenation is not supported\n");
-			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED;
+				 "qid %d: secure concatenation is not supported\n",
+				 qid);
+			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED | NVME_SC_DNR;
 			goto out_free_data;
 		}
 		/* Authentication required */
@@ -549,7 +550,7 @@ int nvmf_connect_io_queue(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl, u16 qid)
 		if (ret) {
 			dev_warn(ctrl->device,
 				 "qid %d: authentication setup failed\n", qid);
-			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED;
+			ret = NVME_SC_AUTH_REQUIRED | NVME_SC_DNR;
 		} else {
 			ret = nvme_auth_wait(ctrl, qid);
 			if (ret)

Is this what you had in mind?