netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] commit c6825c0976fa7893692e0e43b09740b419b23c09 upstream.

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: <20151028023650.7b76098f@playground>
Date:	Wed, 28 Oct 2015 02:36:50 -0400
From:	"Neal P. Murphy" <neal.p.murphy@...m.wpi.edu>
To:	Ani Sinha <ani@...sta.com>
Cc:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] commit c6825c0976fa7893692e0e43b09740b419b23c09
 upstream.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 21:06:33 +0100
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:55:39AM -0700, Ani Sinha wrote:
> > netfilter: nf_conntrack: fix RCU race in nf_conntrack_find_get
> 
> Please, no need to Cc everyone here. Please, submit your Netfilter
> patches to netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org.
> 
> Moreover, it would be great if the subject includes something
> descriptive on what you need, for this I'd suggest:
> 
> [PATCH -stable 3.4,backport] netfilter: nf_conntrack: fix RCU race in nf_conntrack_find_get
> 
> I'm including Neal P. Murphy, he said he would help testing these
> backports, getting a Tested-by: tag usually speeds up things too.

I hammered it a couple nights ago. First test was 5000 processes on 6 SMP CPUs opening and closing a port on a 'remote' host using the usual random source ports. Only got up to 32000 conntracks. The generator was a 64-bit Smoothwall KVM without the patch. The traffic passed through a 32-bit Smoothwall KVM with the patch. The target was on the VM host. No problems encountered. I suspect I didn't come close to triggering the original problem. Second test was a couple thousand processes all using the same source IP and port and dest IP and port. Still no problems. But these were perl scripts (and they used lots of RAM); perhaps a short C program would let me run more.

Any ideas on how I might test it more brutally?

N
--
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