netdev - Re: commit b9ef5513c99b breaks ping to ipv6 linklocal addresses on debian buster

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <964655d2-f74b-68b8-86d5-bc390eabd7a6@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 20:39:21 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     吉藤英明 <hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: commit b9ef5513c99b breaks ping to ipv6 linklocal addresses on
 debian buster

On 1/8/20 6:53 PM, 吉藤英明 wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 2020年1月9日(木) 8:06 Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com
> <mailto:casey@...aufler-ca.com>>:
> 
>     This version should work, I think. Please verify. Thank you.
> 
>     ----
>      security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
>      1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
>     diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
>     index 50c536cad85b..75b3953212e2 100644
>     --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
>     +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
>     @@ -2857,10 +2857,13 @@ static int smack_socket_connect(struct
>     socket *sock, struct sockaddr *sap,
>                     rc = smack_netlabel_send(sock->sk, (struct
>     sockaddr_in *)sap);
>                     break;
>             case PF_INET6:
>     -               if (addrlen < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133 || sap->sa_family !=
>     AF_INET6)
>     -                       return -EINVAL;
>     +               if (addrlen < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133)
>     +                       return 0;
> 
> 
> Why don't we assume AF_UNSPEC as if it were AF_INET6 for AF_INET6
> sockets here?
>  

it is not called out explicitly, but the rest of the proposed change:

 #ifdef SMACK_IPV6_SECMARK_LABELING
-		rsp = smack_ipv6host_label(sip);
+		if (sap->sa_family != AF_INET6)
+			rsp = NULL;
+		else
+			rsp = smack_ipv6host_label(sip);
 		if (rsp != NULL)
 			rc = smk_ipv6_check(ssp->smk_out, rsp, sip,
 						SMK_CONNECTING);

seems to handle AF_UNSPEC. Did you have something else in mind?