netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net/sched: Introduce action ct

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]

Date:   Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:33:13 -0300
From:   Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To:     Paul Blakey <paulb@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>, Roi Dayan <roid@...lanox.com>,
        Yossi Kuperman <yossiku@...lanox.com>,
        Oz Shlomo <ozsh@...lanox.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Aaron Conole <aconole@...hat.com>,
        Zhike Wang <wangzhike@...com>,
        Rony Efraim <ronye@...lanox.com>, nst-kernel@...hat.com,
        John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>,
        Justin Pettit <jpettit@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net/sched: Introduce action ct

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
...
> +static int tcf_ct_fill_params_nat(struct tcf_ct_params *p,
> +				  struct tc_ct *parm,
> +				  struct nlattr **tb,
> +				  struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> +	struct nf_nat_range2 *range;
> +
> +	if (!(p->ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_NAT)) {
> +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Netfilter nat isn't enabled in kernel");
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!(p->ct_action & (TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_SRC | TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_DST)))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if ((p->ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_SRC) &&
> +	    (p->ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_DST)) {
> +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "dnat and snat can't be enabled at the same time");
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +	}
> +
> +	range = &p->range;
> +	if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MIN]) {
> +		range->min_addr.ip =
> +			nla_get_in_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MIN]);
> +		range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> +		p->ipv4_range = true;
> +	}
> +	if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MAX]) {
> +		range->max_addr.ip =
> +			nla_get_in_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MAX]);
> +		range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> +		p->ipv4_range = true;
> +	} else if (range->min_addr.ip) {
> +		range->max_addr.ip = range->min_addr.ip;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MIN]) {
> +		range->min_addr.in6 =
> +			nla_get_in6_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MIN]);
> +		range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> +		p->ipv4_range = false;
> +	}
> +	if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MAX]) {
> +		range->max_addr.in6 =
> +			nla_get_in6_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MAX]);
> +		range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> +		p->ipv4_range = false;
> +	} else if (memchr_inv(&range->min_addr.in6, 0,
> +		   sizeof(range->min_addr.in6))) {
> +		range->max_addr.in6 = range->min_addr.in6;

This will overwrite ipv4_max if it was used, as min/max_addr are
unions.
What about having the _MAX handling (for both ipv4/6) inside the
 if (.._MIN) { }  block ?

> +	}
> +