netdev - Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_nat: avoid double nat for loopback

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1106080913150.1457@ja.ssi.bg>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:26:04 +0300 (EEST)
From:	Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
cc:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_nat: avoid double nat for loopback


	Hello,

On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Patrick McHardy wrote:

> >> to the IPS_SEQ_ADJUST_BIT case to at least avoid it in some cases.
> >> Would that work or am I missing something?
> > 
> > 	Logically, the new check can be after
> > test_bit(IPS_SEQ_ADJUST_BIT, &ct->status). But I suspect
> > some modules adjust seqs in the helper->help call,
> > for example, sip_help_tcp if I'm correctly reading the
> > code.
> 
> Yes, you're right. But it's the only one since it's the only helper
> doing possibly many modifications on a single TCP packet, which can't
> be handled by the generic code properly. So if you're worried about
> performance costs, I'd have no problems adding this check to the SIP
> helper.

	OK, I'm posting new version just for seq adjustment.
I'm not fixing sip_help_tcp because I'm not sure what is
the right fix, we must be sure that calling sip_help_tcp
twice is not a problem.

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
--
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