netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: sctp: inherit auth

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]

Date:	Sat, 19 Jul 2014 00:13:03 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To:	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>
CC:	davem@...emloft.net, jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: sctp: inherit auth_capable on INIT collisions

On 07/18/2014 11:59 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> On 07/18/2014 03:17 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 07/18/2014 04:38 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> ...
>>> Why is the original value of asoc->peer.auth_capable = 0?
>>> In case of collision, asoc is the old association that
>>> existed on the system.  That association was created as part of
>>> sending the INIT.  If it is processing a duplicate COOKIE-ECHO
>>> as you say, then it has already processed the INIT-ACK and
>>> should have determined that the peer is auth capable.
>>>
>>> Thus the capability of the new and the old associations should
>>> be same if we are in fact processing case B (collision).
>>>
>>> If not, then something else if wrong and my guess is that all
>>> other capabilities would be wrong too.
>>
>> I agree that they might likely also be flawed.
>>
>> Ok, let me dig further.
>
> So I think I know why case D ends up not authenticating the COOKIE-ACK.
> Most likely the reason is the following statement:
>   repl = sctp_make_cookie_ack(new_asoc, chunk);
>
> Note that we use new_asoc, instead of current asoc.

Thanks, I will give it a try.

Btw, noticed also that when we have AUTH + COOKIE_ECHO collisions,
we don't seem to handle them properly either. The normal case works
fine, but in case of a collision both sides seem to use wrong RANDOM
etc params, and thus discard the handshake due to bad signature.

> Not sure why case B is dumping core yet.
--
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