netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: fastopen: make key handling more robust against future changes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANn89iJuTq36KMf1madQH08g6K0a-Uj-PDH80ao9zuEw+WNcZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 02:39:04 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@...le.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: fastopen: make key handling more robust against
 future changes

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 2:32 AM Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Some changes to the TCP fastopen code to make it more robust
> against future changes in the choice of key/cookie size, etc.
>
> - Instead of keeping the SipHash key in an untyped u8[] buffer
>   and casting it to the right type upon use, use the correct
>   siphash_key_t type directly. This ensures that the key will
>   appear at the correct alignment if we ever change the way
>   these data structures are allocated. (Currently, they are
>   only allocated via kmalloc so they always appear at the
>   correct alignment)
>
> - Use DIV_ROUND_UP when sizing the u64[] array to hold the
>   cookie, so it is always of sufficient size, even when
>   TCP_FASTOPEN_COOKIE_MAX is no longer a multiple of 8.
>
> - Add a key length check to tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(). No
>   callers exist currently that fail this check (they all pass
>   compile constant values that equal TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH),
>   but future changes might create problems, e.g., by leaving part
>   of the key uninitialized, or overflowing the key buffers.
>
> Note that none of these are functional changes wrt the current
> state of the code.
>
...

> -       memcpy(ctx->key[0], primary_key, len);
> +       if (unlikely(len != TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH)) {
> +               pr_err("TCP: TFO key length %u invalid\n", len);
> +               err = -EINVAL;
> +               goto out;
> +       }


Why a pr_err() is there ?

Can unpriv users flood the syslog ?