netdev - [PATCH] tcp: Reject invalid ack

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1350941196-31224-1-git-send-email-hkchu@google.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:26:36 -0700
From:	"H.K. Jerry Chu" <hkchu@...gle.com>
To:	davem@...emloft.net
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ncardwell@...gle.com, ycheng@...gle.com,
	Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH] tcp: Reject invalid ack_seq to Fast Open sockets

From: Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>

A packet with an invalid ack_seq may cause a TCP Fast Open socket to switch
to the unexpected TCP_CLOSING state, triggering a BUG_ON kernel panic.

When a FIN packet with an invalid ack_seq# arrives at a socket in
the TCP_FIN_WAIT1 state, rather than discarding the packet, the current
code will accept the FIN, causing state transition to TCP_CLOSING.

This may be a small deviation from RFC793, which seems to say that the
packet should be dropped. Unfortunately I did not expect this case for
Fast Open hence it will trigger a BUG_ON panic.

It turns out there is really nothing bad about a TFO socket going into
TCP_CLOSING state so I could just remove the BUG_ON statements. But after
some thought I think it's better to treat this case like TCP_SYN_RECV
and return a RST to the confused peer who caused the unacceptable ack_seq
to be generated in the first place.

Signed-off-by: H.K. Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
Cc: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
---
 net/ipv4/tcp_input.c |   12 ++++++++++--
 net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
index 60cf836..ce3e3c7 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
@@ -5970,7 +5970,7 @@ int tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 
 	req = tp->fastopen_rsk;
 	if (req != NULL) {
-		BUG_ON(sk->sk_state != TCP_SYN_RECV &&
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_state != TCP_SYN_RECV &&
 		    sk->sk_state != TCP_FIN_WAIT1);
 
 		if (tcp_check_req(sk, skb, req, NULL, true) == NULL)
@@ -6059,7 +6059,15 @@ int tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 			 * ACK we have received, this would have acknowledged
 			 * our SYNACK so stop the SYNACK timer.
 			 */
-			if (acceptable && req != NULL) {
+			if (req != NULL) {
+				/* Return RST if ack_seq is invalid.
+				 * Note that RFC793 only says to generate a
+				 * DUPACK for it but for TCP Fast Open it seems
+				 * better to treat this case like TCP_SYN_RECV
+				 * above.
+				 */
+				if (!acceptable)
+					return 1;
 				/* We no longer need the request sock. */
 				reqsk_fastopen_remove(sk, req, false);
 				tcp_rearm_rto(sk);
diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
index fc04711..a24f4a4 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ void tcp_retransmit_timer(struct sock *sk)
 		return;
 	}
 	if (tp->fastopen_rsk) {
-		BUG_ON(sk->sk_state != TCP_SYN_RECV &&
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_state != TCP_SYN_RECV &&
 		    sk->sk_state != TCP_FIN_WAIT1);
 		tcp_fastopen_synack_timer(sk);
 		/* Before we receive ACK to our SYN-ACK don't retransmit
-- 
1.7.7.3

--
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