netdev - [PATCH 9/11] [IPSEC]: Use the top IPv4 route's peer instead of the bottom

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: <E1Ii9yT-0006Hj-00@gondolin.me.apana.org.au>
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:34:17 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 9/11] [IPSEC]: Use the top IPv4 route's peer instead of the bottom

[IPSEC]: Use the top IPv4 route's peer instead of the bottom

For IPv4 we were using the bottom route's peer instead of the top one.
This is wrong because the peer is only used by TCP to keep track of
information about the TCP destination address which certainly does not
live in the bottom route.

This patch fixes that which allows us to get rid of the family check
since the bottom route could be IPv6 while the top one must always
be IPv4.

I've also changed the other fields which are IPv4-specific to get the
info from the top route instead of potentially bogus data from the
bottom route.

Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
---

 net/ipv4/xfrm4_policy.c |   12 ++++++------
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/xfrm4_policy.c b/net/ipv4/xfrm4_policy.c
index c65b8e0..1f0ea0e 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/xfrm4_policy.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/xfrm4_policy.c
@@ -169,16 +169,16 @@ __xfrm4_bundle_create(struct xfrm_policy *policy, struct xfrm_state **xfrm, int
 		dst_prev->neighbour	= neigh_clone(rt->u.dst.neighbour);
 		dst_prev->input		= rt->u.dst.input;
 		dst_prev->output = dst_prev->xfrm->mode->afinfo->output;
-		if (dst_prev->xfrm->props.family == AF_INET && rt->peer)
-			atomic_inc(&rt->peer->refcnt);
-		x->u.rt.peer = rt->peer;
+		if (rt0->peer)
+			atomic_inc(&rt0->peer->refcnt);
+		x->u.rt.peer = rt0->peer;
 		/* Sheit... I remember I did this right. Apparently,
 		 * it was magically lost, so this code needs audit */
 		x->u.rt.rt_flags = rt0->rt_flags&(RTCF_BROADCAST|RTCF_MULTICAST|RTCF_LOCAL);
-		x->u.rt.rt_type = rt->rt_type;
+		x->u.rt.rt_type = rt0->rt_type;
 		x->u.rt.rt_src = rt0->rt_src;
 		x->u.rt.rt_dst = rt0->rt_dst;
-		x->u.rt.rt_gateway = rt->rt_gateway;
+		x->u.rt.rt_gateway = rt0->rt_gateway;
 		x->u.rt.rt_spec_dst = rt0->rt_spec_dst;
 		x->u.rt.idev = rt0->idev;
 		in_dev_hold(rt0->idev);
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static void xfrm4_dst_destroy(struct dst_entry *dst)
 
 	if (likely(xdst->u.rt.idev))
 		in_dev_put(xdst->u.rt.idev);
-	if (dst->xfrm && dst->xfrm->props.family == AF_INET && likely(xdst->u.rt.peer))
+	if (likely(xdst->u.rt.peer))
 		inet_putpeer(xdst->u.rt.peer);
 	xfrm_dst_destroy(xdst);
 }
-
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