| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20120723.132336.801355796496060489.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ipv4: Really ignore ICMP address requests/replies.
Alexey removed kernel side support for requests, and the
only thing we do for replies is log a message if something
doesn't look right.
As Alexey's comment indicates, this belongs in userspace (if
anywhere), and thus we can safely just get rid of this code.
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
---
net/ipv4/icmp.c | 84 ++-----------------------------------------------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/icmp.c b/net/ipv4/icmp.c
index ea3a996..f2a06be 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/icmp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/icmp.c
@@ -837,86 +837,6 @@ out_err:
goto out;
}
-
-/*
- * Handle ICMP_ADDRESS_MASK requests. (RFC950)
- *
- * RFC1122 (3.2.2.9). A host MUST only send replies to
- * ADDRESS_MASK requests if it's been configured as an address mask
- * agent. Receiving a request doesn't constitute implicit permission to
- * act as one. Of course, implementing this correctly requires (SHOULD)
- * a way to turn the functionality on and off. Another one for sysctl(),
- * I guess. -- MS
- *
- * RFC1812 (4.3.3.9). A router MUST implement it.
- * A router SHOULD have switch turning it on/off.
- * This switch MUST be ON by default.
- *
- * Gratuitous replies, zero-source replies are not implemented,
- * that complies with RFC. DO NOT implement them!!! All the idea
- * of broadcast addrmask replies as specified in RFC950 is broken.
- * The problem is that it is not uncommon to have several prefixes
- * on one physical interface. Moreover, addrmask agent can even be
- * not aware of existing another prefixes.
- * If source is zero, addrmask agent cannot choose correct prefix.
- * Gratuitous mask announcements suffer from the same problem.
- * RFC1812 explains it, but still allows to use ADDRMASK,
- * that is pretty silly. --ANK
- *
- * All these rules are so bizarre, that I removed kernel addrmask
- * support at all. It is wrong, it is obsolete, nobody uses it in
- * any case. --ANK
- *
- * Furthermore you can do it with a usermode address agent program
- * anyway...
- */
-
-static void icmp_address(struct sk_buff *skb)
-{
-#if 0
- net_dbg_ratelimited("a guy asks for address mask. Who is it?\n");
-#endif
-}
-
-/*
- * RFC1812 (4.3.3.9). A router SHOULD listen all replies, and complain
- * loudly if an inconsistency is found.
- * called with rcu_read_lock()
- */
-
-static void icmp_address_reply(struct sk_buff *skb)
-{
- struct rtable *rt = skb_rtable(skb);
- struct net_device *dev = skb->dev;
- struct in_device *in_dev;
- struct in_ifaddr *ifa;
-
- if (skb->len < 4 || !(rt->rt_flags&RTCF_DIRECTSRC))
- return;
-
- in_dev = __in_dev_get_rcu(dev);
- if (!in_dev)
- return;
-
- if (in_dev->ifa_list &&
- IN_DEV_LOG_MARTIANS(in_dev) &&
- IN_DEV_FORWARD(in_dev)) {
- __be32 _mask, *mp;
-
- mp = skb_header_pointer(skb, 0, sizeof(_mask), &_mask);
- BUG_ON(mp == NULL);
- for (ifa = in_dev->ifa_list; ifa; ifa = ifa->ifa_next) {
- if (*mp == ifa->ifa_mask &&
- inet_ifa_match(ip_hdr(skb)->saddr, ifa))
- break;
- }
- if (!ifa)
- net_info_ratelimited("Wrong address mask %pI4 from %s/%pI4\n",
- mp,
- dev->name, &ip_hdr(skb)->saddr);
- }
-}
-
static void icmp_discard(struct sk_buff *skb)
{
}
@@ -1080,10 +1000,10 @@ static const struct icmp_control icmp_pointers[NR_ICMP_TYPES + 1] = {
.handler = icmp_discard,
},
[ICMP_ADDRESS] = {
- .handler = icmp_address,
+ .handler = icmp_discard,
},
[ICMP_ADDRESSREPLY] = {
- .handler = icmp_address_reply,
+ .handler = icmp_discard,
},
};
--
1.7.10.4
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists