netdev - Re: [PATCHv4 net-next 16/16] sctp: enable udp tunneling socks

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: <3BC2D946-9EA7-4847-9C6E-B3C9DA6A6618@fh-muenster.de>
Date:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:15:26 +0200
From:   Michael Tuexen <tuexen@...muenster.de>
To:     Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Cc:     Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>,
        network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
        davem <davem@...emloft.net>, Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 net-next 16/16] sctp: enable udp tunneling socks

> On 20. Oct 2020, at 23:11, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 05:12:06PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 6:15 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
>> <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 08:25:33PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>>>> --- a/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
>>>> @@ -2640,6 +2640,12 @@ addr_scope_policy - INTEGER
>>>> 
>>>>      Default: 1
>>>> 
>>>> +udp_port - INTEGER
>>> 
>>> Need to be more verbose here, and also mention the RFC.
>>> 
>>>> +     The listening port for the local UDP tunneling sock.
>>>        , shared by all applications in the same net namespace.
>>>> +     UDP encapsulation will be disabled when it's set to 0.
>>> 
>>>        "Note, however, that setting just this is not enough to actually
>>>        use it. ..."
>> When it's a client, yes,  but when it's a server, the encap_port can
>> be got from the incoming packet.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> +
>>>> +     Default: 9899
>>>> +
>>>> encap_port - INTEGER
>>>>      The default remote UDP encapsalution port.
>>>>      When UDP tunneling is enabled, this global value is used to set
>>> 
>>> When is it enabled, which conditions are needed? Maybe it can be
>>> explained only in the one above.
>> Thanks!
>> pls check if this one will be better:
> 
> It is. Verbose enough now, thx.
> (one other comment below)
> 
>> 
>> udp_port - INTEGER
>> 
>> The listening port for the local UDP tunneling sock.
>> 
>> This UDP sock is used for processing the incoming UDP-encapsulated
>> SCTP packets (from RFC6951), and shared by all applications in the
>> same net namespace. This UDP sock will be closed when the value is
>> set to 0.
>> 
>> The value will also be used to set the src port of the UDP header
>> for the outgoing UDP-encapsulated SCTP packets. For the dest port,
>> please refer to 'encap_port' below.
>> 
>> Default: 9899
> 
> I'm now wondering if this is the right default. I mean, it is the
> standard port for it, yes, but at the same time, it means loading SCTP
> module will steal/use that UDP port on all net namespaces and can lead
> to conflicts with other apps. A more conservative approach here is to
> document the standard port, but set the default to 0 and require the
> user to set it in if it is expected to be used.
> 
> Did FreeBSD enable it by default too?
No. The default is 0, which means that the encapsulation is turned off.
Setting this sysctl variable to a non-zero value enables the UDP tunneling
with the given port.

Best regards
Michael


Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5257 bytes)