netdev - Re: [PATCH ipsec v2] xfrm: Preserve xfrm interface secpath for packets forwarded

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:   Tue, 25 Apr 2023 09:47:03 +0200
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:     Martin Willi <martin@...ongswan.org>
CC:     Benedict Wong <benedictwong@...gle.com>,
        Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec v2] xfrm: Preserve xfrm interface secpath for
 packets forwarded

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 09:45:40AM +0200, Martin Willi wrote:
> 
> 
> > [...] my original change also happens to break Transport-in-Tunnel
> > mode (which attempts to match the outer tunnel mode policy twice.). I
> > wonder if it's worth just reverting first
> 
> Given that the offending commit has been picked up by -stable and now
> by distros, I guess this regression will start affecting more IPsec
> users.
> 
> May I suggest to go with a revert of the offending commit as an
> immediate fix, and then bring in a fixed nested policy check from
> Benedict in a separate effort?
> 
> I'll post a patch with the revert.

I'm fine with that.