netdev - Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v7 4/8] xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec packet offload mode

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: <20221117115939.GI704954@gauss3.secunet.de>
Date:   Thu, 17 Nov 2022 12:59:39 +0100
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC:     Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v7 4/8] xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec
 packet offload mode

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 02:54:32PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>

> @@ -2708,6 +2710,23 @@ static struct dst_entry *xfrm_bundle_create(struct xfrm_policy *policy,
>  	if (!dev)
>  		goto free_dst;
>  
> +	dst1 = &xdst0->u.dst;
> +	/* Packet offload: both policy and SA should be offloaded */
> +	if ((policy->xdo.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET &&
> +	     dst1->xfrm->xso.type != XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET) ||
> +	    (policy->xdo.type != XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET &&
> +	     dst1->xfrm->xso.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET)) {
> +		err = -EINVAL;
> +		goto free_dst;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Packet offload: both policy and SA should have same device */
> +	if (policy->xdo.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET &&
> +	    policy->xdo.dev != dst1->xfrm->xso.dev) {
> +		err = -EINVAL;
> +		goto free_dst;
> +	}
> +

This is the wrong place for these checks. Things went already wrong
in the lookup if policy and state do not match here.