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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20230525184105.1909399-3-sashal@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 14:40:34 -0400 From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org Cc: Benedict Wong <benedictwong@...gle.com>, Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 03/31] xfrm: Check if_id in inbound policy/secpath match From: Benedict Wong <benedictwong@...gle.com> [ Upstream commit 8680407b6f8f5fba59e8f1d63c869abc280f04df ] This change ensures that if configured in the policy, the if_id set in the policy and secpath states match during the inbound policy check. Without this, there is potential for ambiguity where entries in the secpath differing by only the if_id could be mismatched. Notably, this is checked in the outbound direction when resolving templates to SAs, but not on the inbound path when matching SAs and policies. Test: Tested against Android kernel unit tests & CTS Signed-off-by: Benedict Wong <benedictwong@...gle.com> Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> --- net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 11 ++++++----- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c index d15aa62887de0..aa88a8c389abb 100644 --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c @@ -3240,7 +3240,7 @@ xfrm_secpath_reject(int idx, struct sk_buff *skb, const struct flowi *fl) static inline int xfrm_state_ok(const struct xfrm_tmpl *tmpl, const struct xfrm_state *x, - unsigned short family) + unsigned short family, u32 if_id) { if (xfrm_state_kern(x)) return tmpl->optional && !xfrm_state_addr_cmp(tmpl, x, tmpl->encap_family); @@ -3251,7 +3251,8 @@ xfrm_state_ok(const struct xfrm_tmpl *tmpl, const struct xfrm_state *x, (tmpl->allalgs || (tmpl->aalgos & (1<<x->props.aalgo)) || !(xfrm_id_proto_match(tmpl->id.proto, IPSEC_PROTO_ANY))) && !(x->props.mode != XFRM_MODE_TRANSPORT && - xfrm_state_addr_cmp(tmpl, x, family)); + xfrm_state_addr_cmp(tmpl, x, family)) && + (if_id == 0 || if_id == x->if_id); } /* @@ -3263,7 +3264,7 @@ xfrm_state_ok(const struct xfrm_tmpl *tmpl, const struct xfrm_state *x, */ static inline int xfrm_policy_ok(const struct xfrm_tmpl *tmpl, const struct sec_path *sp, int start, - unsigned short family) + unsigned short family, u32 if_id) { int idx = start; @@ -3273,7 +3274,7 @@ xfrm_policy_ok(const struct xfrm_tmpl *tmpl, const struct sec_path *sp, int star } else start = -1; for (; idx < sp->len; idx++) { - if (xfrm_state_ok(tmpl, sp->xvec[idx], family)) + if (xfrm_state_ok(tmpl, sp->xvec[idx], family, if_id)) return ++idx; if (sp->xvec[idx]->props.mode != XFRM_MODE_TRANSPORT) { if (start == -1) @@ -3695,7 +3696,7 @@ int __xfrm_policy_check(struct sock *sk, int dir, struct sk_buff *skb, * are implied between each two transformations. */ for (i = xfrm_nr-1, k = 0; i >= 0; i--) { - k = xfrm_policy_ok(tpp[i], sp, k, family); + k = xfrm_policy_ok(tpp[i], sp, k, family, if_id); if (k < 0) { if (k < -1) /* "-2 - errored_index" returned */ -- 2.39.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists