netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: warn if transport header was not set

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

Date:   Mon, 9 May 2022 10:28:35 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: warn if transport header was not set

On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 10:21 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon,  9 May 2022 09:57:16 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> >
> > Make sure skb_transport_header() and skb_transport_offset() uses
> > are not fooled if the transport header has not been set.
> >
> > This change will likely expose existing bugs in linux networking stacks.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/skbuff.h | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> > index d58669d6cb91aa30edc70d59a0a7e9d4e2298842..043c59fa0bd6d921f2d2e211348929681bfce186 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> > @@ -2804,6 +2804,7 @@ static inline bool skb_transport_header_was_set(const struct sk_buff *skb)
> >
> >  static inline unsigned char *skb_transport_header(const struct sk_buff *skb)
> >  {
> > +     WARN_ON_ONCE(!skb_transport_header_was_set(skb));
> >       return skb->head + skb->transport_header;
> >  }
> >
>
> This is for prod or for syzbot?
>
> What are your feelings on putting this under a kconfig?
>
> We already have a #ifdef DEBUG in skb_checksum_none_assert()
> we could generalize that into some form of kconfig-gated
> SKB_CHECK(). Kconfig-gated so that people don't feel self-conscious
> about using it. I wrote such a patch a few times already but never
> sent it.

Sure, we can add a CONFIG_DEBUG_NET, I think it has been suggested in the past.
Then we can ask syzbot teams to turn on this option.

I will send a series with this.