netdev - Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: drop Inter-Access Point Protocol packets by default

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: <52b1812dd3e843adb63ff67fbe95975f@milecki.pl>
Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:44:43 +0100
From:   Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
        Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
        Franky Lin <franky.lin@...adcom.com>,
        Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@...adcom.com>,
        Chi-Hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@...ress.com>,
        Wright Feng <wright.feng@...ress.com>,
        Pieter-Paul Giesberts <pieter-paul.giesberts@...adcom.com>,
        James Hughes <james.hughes@...pberrypi.org>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com,
        brcm80211-dev-list@...ress.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: drop Inter-Access Point Protocol packets by
 default

On 2018-03-14 15:24, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com> writes:
> 
>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
>> 
>> Testing brcmfmac with more recent firmwares resulted in AP interfaces
>> not working in some specific setups. Debugging resulted in discovering
>> support for IAPP in Broadcom's firmwares. This is an obsoleted 
>> standard
>> and its implementation is something that:
>> 1) Most people don't need / want to use
>> 2) Can allow local DoS attacks
>> 3) Breaks AP interfaces in some specific bridge setups
>> 
>> To solve issues it can cause this commit modifies brcmfmac to drop 
>> IAPP
>> packets. If affects:
>> 1) Rx path: driver won't be sending these unwanted packets up.
>> 2) Tx path: driver will reject packets that would trigger STA
>>    disassociation perfromed by a firmware (possible local DoS attack).
>> 
>> It appears there are some Broadcom's clients/users who care about this
>> feature despite the drawbacks. They can switch it on by a newly added
>> Kconfig option.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
> 
> [...]
> 
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/Kconfig
>> @@ -68,6 +68,26 @@ config BRCMFMAC_PCIE
>>  	  IEEE802.11ac embedded FullMAC WLAN driver. Say Y if you want to
>>  	  use the driver for an PCIE wireless card.
>> 
>> +config BRCMFMAC_IAPP
>> +	bool "Partial support for obsoleted Inter-Access Point Protocol"
>> +	depends on BRCMFMAC
>> +	---help---
>> +	  Most of Broadcom's firmwares can send 802.11f ADD frame every
>> +	  time new STA connects to the AP interface. Some recent ones
>> +	  can also disassociate STA when they receive such a frame.
>> +
>> +	  It's important to understand this behavior can lead to a local
>> +	  DoS security issue. Attacker may trigger disassociation of any
>> +	  STA by sending a proper Ethernet frame to the wireless
>> +	  interface.
>> +
>> +	  Moreover this feature may break AP interfaces in some specific
>> +	  setups. This applies e.g. to the bridge with hairpin mode
>> +	  enabled and IFLA_BRPORT_MCAST_TO_UCAST set. IAPP packet
>> +	  generated by a firmware will get passed back to the wireless
>> +	  interface and cause immediate disassociation of just-connected
>> +	  STA.
> 
> Sorry for jumping late, but does it really make sense to have a Kconfig
> option for this? I don't think we should add a Kconfig option for every
> strange feature, there should be stronger reasons (size savings etc)
> before adding a Kconfig option.
> 
> And in this case the size savings can't be much. Wouldn't a module
> parameter be simpler for a functionality change like this?
> 
>> +/**
>> + * brcmf_skb_is_iapp - checks if skb is an IAPP packet
>> + *
>> + * @skb: skb to check
>> + */
>> +static bool brcmf_skb_is_iapp(struct sk_buff *skb)
>> +{
>> +	const u8 iapp_l2_update_packet[6] __aligned(2) = {
>> +		0x00, 0x01, 0xaf, 0x81, 0x01, 0x00,
>> +	};
> 
> static?

Sure


>> +	unsigned char *eth_data = skb_mac_header(skb) + ETH_HLEN;
>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
> 
> #ifndef?

I followed what is used in the include/linux/etherdevice.h. Is that a
good exceuse? Could it be there any some good reason for #if defined()?


>> +	const u16 *a = (const u16 *)eth_data;
>> +	const u16 *b = (const u16 *)iapp_l2_update_packet;
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +	if (skb->len - skb->mac_len != 6 ||
>> +	    !is_multicast_ether_addr(eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest))
>> +		return false;
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
> 
> #ifdef?