netdev - Re: VLAN packets silently dropped in promiscuous mode

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: <4CB81BF1.1050906@6wind.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:16:33 +0200
From:	Guillaume Gaudonville <guillaume.gaudonville@...nd.com>
To:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
CC:	Roger Luethi <rl@...lgate.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: VLAN packets silently dropped in promiscuous mode

Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Roger Luethi <rl@...lgate.ch> wrote:
>   
>> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:44:26 -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
>>     
>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:37 AM, Roger Luethi <rl@...lgate.ch> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I noticed packets for unknown VLANs getting silently dropped even in
>>>> promiscuous mode (this is true only for the hardware accelerated path).
>>>> netif_nit_deliver was introduced specifically to prevent that, but the
>>>> function gets called only _after_ packets from unknown VLANs have been
>>>> dropped.
>>>>         
>>> Some drivers are fixing this on a case by case basis by disabling
>>> hardware accelerated VLAN stripping when in promiscuous mode, i.e.:
>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=5f6c01819979afbfec7e0b15fe52371b8eed87e8
>>>
>>> However, at this point it is more or less random which drivers do
>>> this.  It would obviously be much better if it were consistent.
>>>       
>> My understanding is this. Hardware VLAN tagging and stripping can always be
>> enabled. The kernel passes 802.1Q information along with the stripped
>> header to libpcap which reassembles the original header where necessary.
>> Works for me.
>>     
>
> Sorry, I misread your original post as saying that the VLAN header
> gets dropped, rather than the entire packet.  I agree that this is how
> it should work but not necessarily how it does work (again, depending
> on the driver).  Here's the problem that I was talking about:
>
> Most drivers have a snippet of code that looks something like this
> (taken from ixgbe):
>
> if (adapter->vlgrp && is_vlan && (tag & VLAN_VID_MASK))
> 	vlan_gro_receive(napi, adapter->vlgrp, tag, skb);
> else
> 	napi_gro_receive(napi, skb);
>
> At this point the VLAN has already been stripped in hardware.  If
> there is no VLAN group configured on the device then we hit the second
> case.  The VLAN header was removed from the SKB and the tag variable
> is unused.  It is no longer possible for libpcap to reconstruct the
> header because the information was thrown away (even the fact that
> there was a VLAN tag at all).
>
> There are a couple ways to fix this:
>
> * Turn off VLAN stripping when in promiscuous mode (as done by the ixgbe driver)
>   
This is not totally true: if changing the MTU ixgbe_change_mtu will call:
 ixgbe_reinit_locked--> ixgbe_up --> ixgbe_configure:
                 --> ixgbe_set_rx_mode: flag IFF_PROMISC is tested 
ixgbe_vlan_filter_enable is not called
                 --> ixgbe_restore_vlan --> ixgbe_vlan_rx_register: flag 
IFF_PROMISC is not tested ixgbe_vlan_filter_enable
                      will be called.

In fact it should happen each time we configure something which needs a 
reset of the device. Why don't add a test
on flag promiscuous directly in ixgbe_vlan_filter_enable? Or do it on 
each call, if we want to allow a device in promiscuous
mode to enable this feature.

What do you think?

> * Reconstruct the VLAN header when there is no VLAN group (as done by
> the tg3 driver)
>   
> A bunch of drivers do neither (bnx2x, for example) and exhibit this
> problem.  It's getting better but it seems like a common issue.
> --
> 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
>   


-- 
Guillaume Gaudonville
6WIND
Software Engineer

Tel: +33 1 39 30 92 63
Mob: +33 6 47 85 34 33
Fax: +33 1 39 30 92 11
guillaume.gaudonville@...nd.com
www.6wind.com
Join the Multicore Packet Processing Forum: www.multicorepacketprocessing.com

Ce courriel ainsi que toutes les pièces jointes, est uniquement destiné à son ou ses destinataires. Il contient des informations confidentielles qui sont la propriété de 6WIND. Toute révélation, distribution ou copie des informations qu'il contient est strictement interdite. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, veuillez immédiatement le signaler à l'émetteur et détruire toutes les données reçues

This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contains information that is confidential and proprietary to 6WIND. All unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.

--
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