netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: protect skb->sk accesses from recursive dereference inside the stack

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]

Message-Id: <20150401.144036.1354401396349418295.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:40:36 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: protect skb->sk accesses from recursive
 dereference inside the stack

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Wed,  1 Apr 2015 17:07:44 +0200

> From: "hannes@...essinduktion.org" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
> 
> We should not consult skb->sk for output decisions in xmit recursion
> levels > 0 in the stack. Otherwise local socket settings could influence
> the result of e.g. tunnel encapsulation process.
> 
> ipv6 does not conform with this in three places:
> 
> 1) ip6_fragment: we do consult ipv6_npinfo for frag_size
> 
> 2) sk_mc_loop in ipv6 uses skb->sk and checks if we should
>    loop the packet back to the local socket
> 
> 3) ip6_skb_dst_mtu could query the settings from the user socket and
>    force a wrong MTU
> 
> Furthermore:
> In sk_mc_loop we could potentially land in WARN_ON(1) if we use a
> PF_PACKET socket ontop of an IPv6-backed vxlan device.
> 
> Reuse xmit_recursion as we are currently only interested in protecting
> tunnel devices.
> 
> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
> ---
> 
> Jiri tried to fix this bug by passing down the tunnel sock pointer.
> Currently there should be no difference in behaviour with this patch.
> 
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/380404/
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/380406/
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/380405/
> 
> In case we do need more specific fragmentation setup semantics we would
> need to go with Jiri's approach. Currently we don't care about sk_mc_loop
> for kernel sockets, so it is easy to just shut them up. Other options
> are safe as well.
> 
> Please review carefully!

As a short term solution I guess this is fine.

I'll let this sit for a day or two so others can review the change.
--
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