netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/18] net: skb_scrub_packet(): Scrub offload_fwd

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: <20181119200625.GA24261@splinter>
Date:   Mon, 19 Nov 2018 22:06:25 +0200
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     idosch@...lanox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        jiri@...lanox.com, petrm@...lanox.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
        mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/18] net: skb_scrub_packet(): Scrub
 offload_fwd_mark

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:07:45AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 16:11:07 +0000
> 
> > From: Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com>
> > 
> > When a packet is trapped and the corresponding SKB marked as
> > already-forwarded, it retains this marking even after it is forwarded
> > across veth links into another bridge. There, since it ingresses the
> > bridge over veth, which doesn't have offload_fwd_mark, it triggers a
> > warning in nbp_switchdev_frame_mark().
> > 
> > Then nbp_switchdev_allowed_egress() decides not to allow egress from
> > this bridge through another veth, because the SKB is already marked, and
> > the mark (of 0) of course matches. Thus the packet is incorrectly
> > blocked.
> > 
> > Solve by resetting offload_fwd_mark() in skb_scrub_packet(). That
> > function is called from tunnels and also from veth, and thus catches the
> > cases where traffic is forwarded between bridges and transformed in a
> > way that invalidates the marking.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com>
> > Suggested-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> 
> As a bug fix this seems relevant for 'net' instead of 'net-next'.

This seemed really obscure/specific to this selftest so I deemed it
unnecessary for 'net'.

Agree that by the book it is 'net' material, so we'll send it there.

Thanks for the feedback