netdev - Re: It's back! (Re: [REGRESSION] NFS is creating a hidden port (left over from xs

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: <C44AFFBB-EF40-4B22-8B45-7817EB7276E3@primarydata.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:17:47 +0000
From:	Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...marydata.com>
To:	Rostedt Steven <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Schumaker Anna <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
	"Linux NFS Mailing List" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Linux Network Devel Mailing List" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Fields Bruce <bfields@...ldses.org>
Subject: Re: It's back! (Re: [REGRESSION] NFS is creating a hidden port (left
 over from xs_bind() ))


> On Jun 30, 2016, at 08:59, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> 
> [ resending as a new email, as I'm assuming people do not sort their
>  INBOX via last email on thread, thus my last email is sitting in the
>  bottom of everyone's INBOX ]
> 
> I've hit this again. Not sure when it started, but I applied my old
> debug trace_printk() patch (attached) and rebooted (4.5.7). I just
> tested the latest kernel from Linus's tree (from last nights pull), and
> it still gives me the problem.
> 
> Here's the trace I have:
> 
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ..s.    61.036129: inet_csk_get_port: snum 805
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ..s.    61.036135: <stack trace>
> => sched_clock
> => inet_addr_type_table
> => security_capable
> => inet_bind
> => xs_bind
> => release_sock
> => sock_setsockopt
> => __sock_create
> => xs_create_sock.isra.19
> => xs_tcp_setup_socket
> => process_one_work
> => worker_thread
> => worker_thread
> => kthread
> => ret_from_fork
> => kthread  
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ..s.    61.036136: inet_bind_hash: add 805
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ..s.    61.036138: <stack trace>
> => inet_csk_get_port
> => sched_clock
> => inet_addr_type_table
> => security_capable
> => inet_bind
> => xs_bind
> => release_sock
> => sock_setsockopt
> => __sock_create
> => xs_create_sock.isra.19
> => xs_tcp_setup_socket
> => process_one_work
> => worker_thread
> => worker_thread
> => kthread
> => ret_from_fork
> => kthread  
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ....    61.036139: xs_bind: RPC:       xs_bind 4.136.255.255:805: ok (0)
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ....    61.036140: xs_tcp_setup_socket: RPC:       worker connecting xprt ffff880407eca800 via tcp to 192.168.23.22 (port 43651)
>    kworker/3:1H-134   [003] ....    61.036162: xs_tcp_setup_socket: RPC:       ffff880407eca800 connect status 115 connected 0 sock state 2
>          <idle>-0     [001] ..s.    61.036450: xs_tcp_state_change: RPC:       xs_tcp_state_change client ffff880407eca800...
>          <idle>-0     [001] ..s.    61.036452: xs_tcp_state_change: RPC:       state 1 conn 0 dead 0 zapped 1 sk_shutdown 0
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036476: xprt_connect_status: RPC:    43 xprt_connect_status: retrying
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036478: xprt_prepare_transmit: RPC:    43 xprt_prepare_transmit
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036479: xprt_transmit: RPC:    43 xprt_transmit(72)
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036486: xs_tcp_send_request: RPC:       xs_tcp_send_request(72) = 0
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036487: xprt_transmit: RPC:    43 xmit complete
>          <idle>-0     [001] ..s.    61.036789: xs_tcp_data_ready: RPC:       xs_tcp_data_ready...
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036798: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       xs_tcp_data_recv started
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036799: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       reading TCP record fragment of length 24
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036799: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       reading XID (4 bytes)
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036800: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       reading request with XID 2f4c3f88
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036800: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       reading CALL/REPLY flag (4 bytes)
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036801: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       read reply XID 2f4c3f88
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ..s.    61.036801: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       XID 2f4c3f88 read 16 bytes
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ..s.    61.036802: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       xprt = ffff880407eca800, tcp_copied = 24, tcp_offset = 24, tcp_reclen = 24
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ..s.    61.036802: xprt_complete_rqst: RPC:    43 xid 2f4c3f88 complete (24 bytes received)
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036803: xs_tcp_data_recv: RPC:       xs_tcp_data_recv done
>    kworker/1:1H-136   [001] ....    61.036812: xprt_release: RPC:    43 release request ffff88040b270800
> 
> 
> # unhide-tcp 
> Unhide-tcp 20130526
> Copyright © 2013 Yago Jesus & Patrick Gouin
> License GPLv3+ : GNU GPL version 3 or later
> http://www.unhide-forensics.info
> Used options: 
> [*]Starting TCP checking
> 
> Found Hidden port that not appears in ss: 805
> 

What is a “Hidden port that not appears in ss: 805”, and what does this report mean? Are we failing to close a socket?

Cheers
  Trond