netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ip6_tunnel: Allow rcv/xmit even if remote address is a local address

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:   Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:34:25 +0900 (KST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     shmulik@...f.io
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, shmulik.ladkani@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ip6_tunnel: Allow rcv/xmit even if remote
 address is a local address

From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik@...f.io>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 00:25:15 +0300

> From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
> 
> Currently, ip6_tnl_xmit_ctl drops tunneled packets if the remote
> address (outer v6 destination) is one of host's locally configured
> addresses.
> Same applies to ip6_tnl_rcv_ctl: it drops packets if the remote address
> (outer v6 source) is a local address.
> 
> This prevents using ipxip6 (and ip6_gre) tunnels whose local/remote
> endpoints are on same host; OTOH v4 tunnels (ipip or gre) allow such
> configurations.
> 
> An example where this proves useful is a system where entities are
> identified by their unique v6 addresses, and use tunnels to encapsulate
> traffic between them. The limitation prevents placing several entities
> on same host.
> 
> Introduce IP6_TNL_F_ALLOW_LOCAL_REMOTE which allows to bypass this
> restriction.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>

Given this wasn't allowed for so long, making it configurable makes
sense.

Applied, thanks.