netdev - Re: [PATCH 10/19] xfrm: interface: support IP6IP6 and IP6IP tunnels processing with .cb

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: <2df6aeeb-bad8-e148-d5de-d7a30207cd4c@6wind.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Oct 2020 17:40:30 +0200
From:   Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
To:     Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Cc:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/19] xfrm: interface: support IP6IP6 and IP6IP tunnels
 processing with .cb_handler

Le 05/10/2020 à 17:11, Nicolas Dichtel a écrit :
> Le 03/10/2020 à 11:41, Xin Long a écrit :
> [snip]
>> When xfrmi processes the ipip packets, it does the state lookup and xfrmi
>> device lookup both in xfrm_input(). When either of them fails, instead of
>> returning err and continuing the next .handler in tunnel4_rcv(), it would
>> drop the packet and return 0.
>>
>> It's kinda the same as xfrm_tunnel_rcv() and xfrm6_tunnel_rcv().
>>
>> So the safe fix is to lower the priority of xfrmi .handler but it should
>> still be higher than xfrm_tunnel_rcv() and xfrm6_tunnel_rcv(). Having
>> xfrmi loaded will only break IPCOMP, and it's expected. I'll post a fix:
> Thanks. This patch fixes my test cases.
Do you think that you will have time to send the patch before the release (v5.9)
goes out?
If not, I can send it ;-)