netdev - Re: VRF Issue Since kernel 5

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: <fb75df70-ef65-320c-7be5-ed51193f354b@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Apr 2020 09:36:39 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com,
        Maximilian Bosch <maximilian@...sch.me>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: VRF Issue Since kernel 5

On 4/8/20 4:07 AM, Mike Manning wrote:
> Hi Maximilian,
> Can you please clarify what the issue is with using 'ip vrf exec <vrf>
> ssh' for running the ssh client in the vrf? This is the recommended
> method for running an application in a VRF. As part of our VRF

Running a client in default vrf and using route leaking to get the
packet to go out is a broken setup. If it ever worked at all it was
sheer luck and not the intention of the design. Route leaking between
VRFs is for forwarding, not local processes. If a local process is to
work over a VRF it MUST set the VRF on the socket; anything else is just
broken.