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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 5 Jun 2016 10:40:04 +0300
From:	Ido Schimmel <>
To:	<>, <>, <>
CC:	<>, <>,
	<>, <>, <>,
	<>, <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bridge: Fix incorrect re-injection of STP packets

Hi Florian,

Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 12:39:45PM IDT, wrote:
>Commit 8626c56c8279 ("bridge: fix potential use-after-free when hook
>returns QUEUE or STOLEN verdict") fixed incorrect usage of NF_HOOK's
>return value by consuming packets in okfn via br_pass_frame_up().
>However, this function re-injects packets to the Rx path with skb->dev
>set to the bridge device, which breaks kernel's STP, as all STP packets
>appear to originate from the bridge device itself.
>Instead, if okfn was called for a packet, make bridge's rx_handler
>re-inject it to the Rx path by returning RX_HANDLER_PASS. This is
>consistent with previous behavior.
>Cc: Florian Westphal <>
>Fixes: 8626c56c8279 ("bridge: fix potential use-after-free when hook returns QUEUE or STOLEN verdict")
>Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <>
>Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <>

I read your commit more closely and also looked at nf_reinject() and I'm
not sure how the fix should be carried out.

After packet is processed by okfn it should return to the Rx path -
by making bridge's rx_handler return RX_HANDLER_PASS - so that it 
could be picked up by the packet handlers.

However, if verdict is NF_QUEUE and packet is later re-injected via
nf_reinject() then this can't happen, as rx_handler already returned
RX_HANDLER_CONSUMED for the packet.

So, my patch is wrong because it doesn't consume the packet in okfn, but
yours consumes it in a way which breaks current packet handlers.

Any suggestions regarding a fix? I have a feeling I'm missing something


Powered by blists - more mailing lists