netdev - Re: IPsec replay sequence number overflow behavior? (RFC4303 section 3.3.3)

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]

Date:	Mon, 10 Dec 2007 04:16:36 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	latten@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: IPsec replay sequence number overflow behavior? (RFC4303 section
 3.3.3)

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 09:37:56AM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
>   
>> Thanks for clearing that up, I'll send a patch this week; complete with an 
>> unlikely (similar to the RFC quality IPsec audit patch I sent on Friday) and 
>> a decrement to the sequence counter in case of rollover.
>>     
>
> Actually I think we should just use the SA expire mechanism
> to do this.  The reason is that the overflow we want to detect
> only applies to 32-bit sequence numbers.  In future we will be
> making our sequence numbers 64-bit.
>
> When we do that we can no longer just check against wrapping
> to zero since we need to know whether ESNs are in use or not.
>
> The easiest fix is to just force the hard_packet_limit to 2^32.
> upon SA creation.

Won't this break with manually installed SAs (without a keying
daemon)?


--
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