netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/4] [UDP]: fix send buffer 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: <476B3655.4000508@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:43:17 -0500
From:	Hideo AOKI <haoki@...hat.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	tyasui@...hat.com, mhiramat@...hat.com,
	satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com, billfink@...dspring.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, johnpol@....mipt.ru,
	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com, haoki@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] [UDP]: fix send buffer check

Hello,

David Miller wrote:

>> diff -pruN net-2.6/net/ipv4/ip_output.c net-2.6-udp-take11a1-p1/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
>> --- net-2.6/net/ipv4/ip_output.c	2007-12-11 10:54:55.000000000 -0500
>> +++ net-2.6-udp-take11a1-p1/net/ipv4/ip_output.c	2007-12-17 14:42:31.000000000 -0500
>> @@ -1004,6 +1004,11 @@ alloc_new_skb:
>>  					frag = &skb_shinfo(skb)->frags[i];
>>  				}
>>  			} else if (i < MAX_SKB_FRAGS) {
>> +				if (atomic_read(&sk->sk_wmem_alloc) + PAGE_SIZE
>> +				    > 2 * sk->sk_sndbuf) {
>> +					err = -ENOBUFS;
>> +					goto error;
>> +				}
>>  				if (copy > PAGE_SIZE)
>>  					copy = PAGE_SIZE;
>>  				page = alloc_pages(sk->sk_allocation, 0);
> 
> If we are going to do this, we need to add the same check to
> skb_append_datato_frags() which is invoked via ip_ufo_append_data().
> 
> We also have to be very careful in this area.  One problem we had a
> long time ago was that we would socket account when fragmenting an
> outgoing frame.  This was bogus because even if the socket had enough
> space for one full sized frame, the packet send would fail because it
> could not fit the space for both the original frame and the
> fragmented copy of it.
> 
> This situation was cured by simply not enforcing accounting for the
> fragmented copy.  It is valid because after we fragment, we keep
> the fragmented copy but free the original.
> 
> This doesn't apply directly to this specific patch, but it is
> something to keep in mind when doing these changes.

Hello,

Thank you for sharing your experience.

Let me investigate this code and skb_append_datato_frags().

I'll include the check code in next patch set if it is really needed.

Regards,
Hideo

-- 
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
--
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