netdev - Re: ss filter problem

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, 29 Mar 2016 23:05:19 +0300
From:	Vadim Kochan <vadim4j@...il.com>
To:	Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>, Vadim Kochan <vadim4j@...il.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ss filter problem

Hi Phil,

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 09:32:42PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am trying to fix a bug in ss filter code, but feel quite lost right
> now. The issue is this:
> 
> | ss -nl -f inet '( sport = :22 )'
> 
> prints not only listening sockets (as requested by -l flag), but
> established ones as well (reproduce by opening ssh connection to
> 127.0.0.1 before calling above).
> 
> In contrast, the following both don't show the established sockets:
> 
> | ss -nl '( sport = :22 )'
> | ss -nl -f inet
> 
> My investigation led me to see that current_filter.states is altered
> after ssfilter_parse() returns, and using gdb with a watchpoint I was
> able to identify parse_hostcond() to be the bad guy: In line 1560, it
> calls filter_af_set() after checking for fam != AF_UNSPEC (which is the
> case, since fam = preferred_family and the latter is changed to AF_INET
> when parsing '-f inet' parameter).

Yes, after removing of fam != AF_UNSPEC body - it works, because
it does not overwrite specified states (-l) from command line, but I
can't say what it may affect else, I will try to investigate it better.

> 
> This whole jumping back and forth confuses me quite effectively. Since
> you did some fixes in the past already, are you possibly able to point
> out where/how this tiny mess has to be fixed?
> 
> I guess in an ideal world we would translate '-l' to 'state listen', '-f
> inet' to 'src inet:*' and pass everything ANDed together to
> ssfilter_parse(). Or maybe that would make things even worse. ;)
> 
> Cheers, Phil

I thought I fixed & tested well ss filter, but seems it would be good to
have good automation testing.

Regards,
Vadim Kochan