netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] neigh: fix possible DoS due to net iface start/stop loop

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: <eb1a9b6d-8e43-8d0a-70a5-578af0c0bbfe@virtuozzo.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 Aug 2022 17:44:16 +0200
From:   "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...tuozzo.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander.mikhalitsyn@...tuozzo.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Yajun Deng <yajun.deng@...ux.dev>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@...tuozzo.com>, kernel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] neigh: fix possible DoS due to net iface start/stop
 loop

On 01.08.2022 17:08, David Ahern wrote:
> On 7/29/22 4:35 AM, Alexander Mikhalitsyn wrote:
>> The patch proposed doing very simple thing. It drops only packets from
> it does 2 things - adds a namespace check and a performance based change
> with the way the list is walked.
I believe no. All items are removed before the patch and
all items are walked after the patch, similar O(n) operation.


>> the same namespace in the pneigh_queue_purge() where network interface
>> state change is detected. This is enough to prevent the problem for the
>> whole node preserving original semantics of the code.
>>
>
>> diff --git a/net/core/neighbour.c b/net/core/neighbour.c
>> index 54625287ee5b..213ec0be800b 100644
>> --- a/net/core/neighbour.c
>> +++ b/net/core/neighbour.c
>> @@ -386,8 +396,7 @@ static int __neigh_ifdown(struct neigh_table *tbl, struct net_device *dev,
>>   	neigh_flush_dev(tbl, dev, skip_perm);
>>   	pneigh_ifdown_and_unlock(tbl, dev);
>>   
>> -	del_timer_sync(&tbl->proxy_timer);
> why are you removing this line too?

Because we have packets in the queue after the purge and they have to be 
processed.
May be we should better do

if (skb_queue_empty(&tbl->proxy_queue))
    del_timer_sync(&tbl->proxy_timer);

after the purge. That could be more correct.

>> -	pneigh_queue_purge(&tbl->proxy_queue);
>> +	pneigh_queue_purge(&tbl->proxy_queue, dev_net(dev));
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
>>