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:   Mon, 21 Oct 2019 20:49:54 +0200
From:   William Dauchy <wdauchy@...il.com>
To:     Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        NETDEV <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
        Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@...le.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next] tcp: add TCP_INFO status for failed client TFO

Hello Jason,

On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 11:10 AM Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com> wrote:
> The TCPI_OPT_SYN_DATA bit as part of tcpi_options currently reports whether
> or not data-in-SYN was ack'd on both the client and server side. We'd like
> to gather more information on the client-side in the failure case in order
> to indicate the reason for the failure. This can be useful for not only
> debugging TFO, but also for creating TFO socket policies. For example, if
> a middle box removes the TFO option or drops a data-in-SYN, we can
> can detect this case, and turn off TFO for these connections saving the
> extra retransmits.
>
> The newly added tcpi_fastopen_client_fail status is 2 bits and has 4
> states:
>
> 1) TFO_STATUS_UNSPEC
>
> catch-all.
>
> 2) TFO_NO_COOKIE_SENT
>
> If TFO_CLIENT_NO_COOKIE mode is off, this state indicates that no cookie
> was sent because we don't have one yet, its not in cache or black-holing
> may be enabled (already indicated by the global
> LINUX_MIB_TCPFASTOPENBLACKHOLE).
>
> 3) TFO_NO_SYN_DATA
>
> Data was sent with SYN, we received a SYN/ACK but it did not cover the data
> portion. Cookie is not accepted by server because the cookie may be invalid
> or the server may be overloaded.
>
>
> 4) TFO_NO_SYN_DATA_TIMEOUT
>
> Data was sent with SYN, we received a SYN/ACK which did not cover the data
> after at least 1 additional SYN was sent (without data). It may be the case
> that a middle-box is dropping data-in-SYN packets. Thus, it would be more
> efficient to not use TFO on this connection to avoid extra retransmits
> during connection establishment.
>
> These new fields certainly not cover all the cases where TFO may fail, but
> other failures, such as SYN/ACK + data being dropped, will result in the
> connection not becoming established. And a connection blackhole after
> session establishment shows up as a stalled connection.

I'm curious what would be the arguments compared to creating a new
getsockopt() to fetch this data?

Thanks,

-- 
William

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ