netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] ipv6: Select fragment id during UFO/GSO segmentation if not set.

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:	Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:08:08 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	vyasevic@...hat.com, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ipv6: Select fragment id during UFO/GSO segmentation
 if not set.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 05:02:31PM +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Di, 2015-01-27 at 09:26 -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> > On 01/27/2015 08:47 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> > > On Di, 2015-01-27 at 10:42 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 02:47:54AM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 09:37 -0500, Vladislav Yasevich wrote:
> > >>>> If the IPv6 fragment id has not been set and we perform
> > >>>> fragmentation due to UFO, select a new fragment id.
> > >>>> When we store the fragment id into skb_shinfo, set the bit
> > >>>> in the skb so we can re-use the selected id.
> > >>>> This preserves the behavior of UFO packets generated on the
> > >>>> host and solves the issue of id generation for packet sockets
> > >>>> and tap/macvtap devices.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This patch moves ipv6_select_ident() back in to the header file.  
> > >>>> It also provides the helper function that sets skb_shinfo() frag
> > >>>> id and sets the bit.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It also makes sure that we select the fragment id when doing
> > >>>> just gso validation, since it's possible for the packet to
> > >>>> come from an untrusted source (VM) and be forwarded through
> > >>>> a UFO enabled device which will expect the fragment id.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> CC: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>>  include/linux/skbuff.h |  3 ++-
> > >>>>  include/net/ipv6.h     |  2 ++
> > >>>>  net/ipv6/ip6_output.c  |  4 ++--
> > >>>>  net/ipv6/output_core.c |  9 ++++++++-
> > >>>>  net/ipv6/udp_offload.c | 10 +++++++++-
> > >>>>  5 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> > >>>> index 85ab7d7..3ad5203 100644
> > >>>> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
> > >>>> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> > >>>> @@ -605,7 +605,8 @@ struct sk_buff {
> > >>>>  	__u8			ipvs_property:1;
> > >>>>  	__u8			inner_protocol_type:1;
> > >>>>  	__u8			remcsum_offload:1;
> > >>>> -	/* 3 or 5 bit hole */
> > >>>> +	__u8			ufo_fragid_set:1;
> > >>> [...]
> > >>>
> > >>> Doesn't the flag belong in struct skb_shared_info, rather than struct
> > >>> sk_buff?  Otherwise this looks fine.
> > >>>
> > >>> Ben.
> > >>
> > >> Hmm we seem to be out of tx flags.
> > >> Maybe ip6_frag_id == 0 should mean "not set".
> > > 
> > > Maybe that is the best idea. Definitely the ufo_fragid_set bit should
> > > move into the skb_shared_info area.
> > 
> > That's what I originally wanted to do, but had to move and grow txflags thus
> > skb_shinfo ended up growing.  I wanted to avoid that, so stole an skb flag.
> > 
> > I considered treating fragid == 0 as unset, but a 0 fragid is perfectly valid
> > from the protocol perspective and could actually be generated by the id generator
> > functions.  This may cause us to call the id generation multiple times.
> 
> Are there plans in the long run to let virtio_net transmit auxiliary
> data to the other end so we can clean all of this this up one day?
> 
> I don't like the whole situation: looking into the virtio_net headers
> just adding a field for ipv6 fragmentation ids to those small structs
> seems bloated, not doing it feels incorrect. :/
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Bye,
> Hannes

I'm not sure - what will be achieved by generating the IDs guest side as
opposed to host side?  It's certainly harder to get hold of entropy
guest-side.

-- 
MST
--
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