netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: skbuff: Fix length validation in skb_vlan

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 20 Sep 2016 07:36:02 +0300
From:   Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
To:     pravin shelar <pshelar@....org>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: skbuff: Fix length validation in skb_vlan_pop()

Hi,

On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:46:10 -0700 pravin shelar <pshelar@....org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Shmulik Ladkani
> <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com> wrote:
> > Hi Pravin,
> >
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:26:30 -0700 pravin shelar <pshelar@....org> wrote:  
> >> > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> >> > @@ -4537,7 +4537,7 @@ int skb_vlan_pop(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >> >         } else {
> >> >                 if (unlikely((skb->protocol != htons(ETH_P_8021Q) &&
> >> >                               skb->protocol != htons(ETH_P_8021AD)) ||
> >> > -                            skb->len < VLAN_ETH_HLEN))
> >> > +                            skb->mac_len < VLAN_ETH_HLEN))  
> >>
> >> There is already check in __skb_vlan_pop() to validate skb for a vlan
> >> header. So it is safe to drop this check entirely.  
> >
> > Yep, I submitted a v2 with your suggestion, however I withdrew it, as
> > there is a slight behavior difference noticable by 'skb_vlan_pop' callers.
> >
> > Suppose the rare case where skb->len is too small.
> >
> > pre:
> >   skb_vlan_pop returns 0 (at least for the correct tx path).
> >   Meaning, callers do not see it as a failure.
> > post:
> >   skb_ensure_writable fails (!pskb_may_pull), therefore -ENOMEM returned
> >   to the callers of 'skb_vlan_pop'.
> >
> > For ovs, it means do_execute_actions's loop is terminated, no further
> > actions are executed, and skb gets freed.
> >
> > For tc act vlan, it means skb gets dropped.
> >
> > This actually makes sense, but do we want to present this change?
> >  
> I think this is correct behavior over existing code.

Ok.
I'll submit a v3 identical to v2 but with proper statement of this
behavior change in the commit log.

Thanks.