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  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:   Sat, 10 Oct 2020 12:25:45 +0200
From:   Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        maze@...gle.com, lmb@...udflare.com, shaun@...era.io,
        Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, marek@...udflare.com,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, eyal.birger@...il.com,
        willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next V3 1/6] bpf: Remove MTU check in
 __bpf_skb_max_len

On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 18:12:20 +0200
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:

> On 10/8/20 4:09 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > Multiple BPF-helpers that can manipulate/increase the size of the SKB uses
> > __bpf_skb_max_len() as the max-length. This function limit size against
> > the current net_device MTU (skb->dev->mtu).
> > 
> > When a BPF-prog grow the packet size, then it should not be limited to the
> > MTU. The MTU is a transmit limitation, and software receiving this packet
> > should be allowed to increase the size. Further more, current MTU check in
> > __bpf_skb_max_len uses the MTU from ingress/current net_device, which in
> > case of redirects uses the wrong net_device.
> > 
> > Keep a sanity max limit of IP6_MAX_MTU (under CONFIG_IPV6) which is 64KiB
> > plus 40 bytes IPv6 header size. If compiled without IPv6 use IP_MAX_MTU.
> > 
> > V3: replace __bpf_skb_max_len() with define and use IPv6 max MTU size.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
> > ---
> >   net/core/filter.c |   16 ++++++++--------
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> > index 05df73780dd3..ddc1f9ba89d1 100644
> > --- a/net/core/filter.c
> > +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> > @@ -3474,11 +3474,11 @@ static int bpf_skb_net_shrink(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 off, u32 len_diff,
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
> >   
> > -static u32 __bpf_skb_max_len(const struct sk_buff *skb)
> > -{
> > -	return skb->dev ? skb->dev->mtu + skb->dev->hard_header_len :
> > -			  SKB_MAX_ALLOC;
> > -}
> > +#ifdef IP6_MAX_MTU /* Depend on CONFIG_IPV6 */
> > +#define BPF_SKB_MAX_LEN IP6_MAX_MTU
> > +#else
> > +#define BPF_SKB_MAX_LEN IP_MAX_MTU
> > +#endif  
> 
> Shouldn't that check on skb->protocol? The way I understand it is
> that a number of devices including virtual ones use ETH_MAX_MTU as
> their dev->max_mtu, so the mtu must be in the range of
> dev->min_mtu(=ETH_MIN_MTU), dev->max_mtu(=ETH_MAX_MTU).
> __dev_set_mtu() then sets the user value to dev->mtu in the core if
> within this range. That means in your case skb->dev->hard_header_len
> for example is left out, meaning if we go for some constant, that
> would need to be higher.

Sorry, but I think you have missed the point.  This BPF_SKB_MAX_LEN is
just a sanity max limit.  We are removing the limit for BPF-progs to
change the size of the packet (regardless of MTU).

This will allow BPF-ingress to increase packet size (up-to this sanity
limit) and then BPF-egress can decrease packet size again, before
sending it to the actual dev.  It is up to the BPF-programmer that to
use this for, but I think this adds good flexibility, instead of being
limited to the *transmit* size (MTU) of the dev.  This is software why
have this MTU limit.

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer

Powered by blists - more mailing lists