netdev - Re: [PATCH net] ip_tunnel: Don't allow to add the same tunnel multiple times.

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: <20140926.004300.883593012234297777.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 26 Sep 2014 00:43:00 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	steffen.klassert@...unet.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ip_tunnel: Don't allow to add the same tunnel
 multiple times.

From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:30:51 +0200

> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:45:56PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
>> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:11:08 +0200
>> 
>> > When we try to add an already existing tunnel, we don't return
>> > an error. Instead we continue and call ip_tunnel_update().
>> > This means that we can change existing tunnels by adding
>> > the same tunnel multiple times. It is even possible to change
>> > the tunnel endpoints of the fallback device.
>> > 
>> > We fix this by returning an error if we try to add an existing
>> > tunnel.
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
>> > ---
>> > 
>> > I was not able to find a commit that introduced this bug.
>> > Looks like ipip and ip_gre had similar bugs already with
>> > the initial git commit.
>> 
>> I'm not so sure about this, perhaps the behavior of being able to
>> change a configuration using an ADD call is intentional?
> 
> Hm, I don't think so. Initially it was the same like with ipv6.
> It was possible to add the same tunnel muliple times without
> getting an error, no config change was made. The possibilty
> to change the configuration by adding the same tunnel a second
> time came with the tunnel code unification.

Ok, makes sense.  Applied, thanks Steffen.

If I had a euro for every regression introduced by that tunnel
unification patch set I'd be a rich man indeed :-/
--
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