netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] netkit: use netlink policy for mode and policy attributes validation

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: <8533255d-9b73-cdbe-fbbd-28a275313229@iogearbox.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:25:33 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
 Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 martin.lau@...ux.dev, ast@...nel.org, andrii@...nel.org,
 john.fastabend@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org, andrew@...n.ch, toke@...nel.org,
 toke@...hat.com, sdf@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] netkit: use netlink policy for mode and
 policy attributes validation

On 10/26/23 4:23 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> On 10/26/23 17:11, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 12:41:06PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>>>   static const struct nla_policy netkit_policy[IFLA_NETKIT_MAX + 1] = {
>>>       [IFLA_NETKIT_PEER_INFO]        = { .len = sizeof(struct ifinfomsg) },
>>> -    [IFLA_NETKIT_POLICY]        = { .type = NLA_U32 },
>>> -    [IFLA_NETKIT_MODE]        = { .type = NLA_U32 },
>>> -    [IFLA_NETKIT_PEER_POLICY]    = { .type = NLA_U32 },
>>> +    [IFLA_NETKIT_POLICY]        = NLA_POLICY_VALIDATE_FN(NLA_U32,
>>> +                                 netkit_check_policy),
>>
>> Nik, it's problematic to use NLA_POLICY_VALIDATE_FN() with anything
>> other than NLA_BINARY. See commit 9e17f99220d1 ("net/sched: act_mpls:
>> Fix warning during failed attribute validation").
> 
> But how is that code called at all? The validation type is NLA_VALIDATE_FUNCTION(), not NLA_VALIDATE_MIN/MAX/RANGE/RANGE_WARN...
> nla_validate_int_range() is called only on:
>          case NLA_VALIDATE_RANGE_PTR:
>          case NLA_VALIDATE_RANGE:
>          case NLA_VALIDATE_RANGE_WARN_TOO_LONG:
>          case NLA_VALIDATE_MIN:
>          case NLA_VALIDATE_MAX:
> 
> Anyway, I'll switch to NLA_BINARY in a bit to make sure it's ok. Thanks for the pointer.

Sg, I took in the NULL removal one for now.

Thanks,
Daniel