netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix false positives in can_checksum

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1444043817.4674.162.camel@infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:16:57 +0100
From:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix false positives in can_checksum_protocol()

On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 15:52 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
> Please look at ixgbe_tx_csum in ixgbe driver. This one example of how
> a driver can determine whether the checksum being offloaded is TCP or
> UDP. The bug in this driver is...

I think it serves better as an example of why we don't *want* drivers
doing that kind of thing for themselves... :)

I propose we steal some high bits from csum_offset, as you suggested,
and use them to indicate a 'checksum type', which will include TCP and
UDP.

Then the filter in netif_skb_features() can trivially do the right
thing for NETIF_F_IP{V6,}_CSUM devices, so avoid feeding them packets
they can't handle.

You mentioned that you actually want to deprecate those feature flags —
which works for me, but it's kind of orthogonal. If we do that we'd
still want to provide generic functions that such drivers can use as
their .ndo_features_check() method. And we'd *still* want to do the
check based on a simple flag, rather than grubbing around in the packet
data. (And the drivers if they *are* asked to do the checksum will
sometimes care whether it's TCP vs. UDP too).

I don't think we want drivers calling skb_checksum_help() for
themselves; we want the pre-filter. Mainly because we *definitely*
don't want drivers calling gso_skb_segment() for themselves in the same
situation — see the comment I posted on Friday about the r8169 instance
of that. ('Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] r8169: support IPv6').

-- 
David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@...el.com                              Intel Corporation

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5691 bytes)