netdev - Re: [tproxy,regression] tproxy broken in 2.6.32

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: <1259446815.3864.97.camel@bigi>
Date:	Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:20:15 -0500
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	hidden@....bme.hu, kaber@...sh.net, hidden@...abit.hu,
	aschultz@...p10.net, tproxy@...ts.balabit.hu,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tproxy,regression] tproxy broken in 2.6.32

On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 13:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:

> What matters is that this worked for years and we broke it.

But Tproxy just went in.

> There is no other valid discussion about this.

Surely we can have a valid technical discussion, no? 
I would like to hear from Krisztian his reasoning for using LOCAL
routes. There may be good reasons.

> The only thing to "pick" right now is whether we revert the
> thing completely or add a sysctl and default it to off.
>
> I prefer the former because nobody is going to turn the thing
> on, especially not distributions, and that's %99.9999 of users.

There is nothing to sysctl control. 
IMO, what is at stake here is the check:

-----
        if (res.type != RTN_UNICAST)
                goto e_inval_res;
----

There are several ways to resolve that:
a) either we say RTN_LOCAL is also legit if some
skb->transparent is set. IMO it is not worth it.
b) have the routing table (as programmed by the user) return 
RTN_UNICAST
c)do the approach Krisztian talked about - which is also
user space controlled.

cheers,
jamal

--
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