netdev - Re: [PATCH net,v2] ipvlan: implement .parse_protocol hook function in ipvlan_header

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]

Message-ID: <91c00925-035f-637d-8cc4-a3b8692bc1fc@huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2023 20:50:19 +0800
From: shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
CC: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, <luwei32@...wei.com>, <fw@...len.de>,
	<maheshb@...gle.com>, <weiyongjun1@...wei.com>, <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net,v2] ipvlan: implement .parse_protocol hook function in
 ipvlan_header_ops



On 2023/12/2 18:34, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 3:14 AM shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2023/12/1 23:22, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>> shaozhengchao wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2023/12/1 10:55, Zhengchao Shao wrote:
>>>>> The .parse_protocol hook function in the ipvlan_header_ops structure is
>>>>> not implemented. As a result, when the AF_PACKET family is used to send
>>>>> packets, skb->protocol will be set to 0.
>>>>> Ipvlan is a device of type ARPHRD_ETHER (ether_setup). Therefore, use
>>>>> eth_header_parse_protocol function to obtain the protocol.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 2ad7bf363841 ("ipvlan: Initial check-in of the IPVLAN driver.")
>>>>
>>>> Maybe Fixes should be: 75c65772c3d1 ("net/packet: Ask driver for
>>>> protocol if not provided by user")
>>>
>> Hi Willem:
>>> Definitely not anything older than the introduction of
>>> header_ops.parse_protocol.
>>>
>>      Yes, I think so.
>>> I gave my +1 when it targeted net-next, so imho this is not really
>>> stable material anyhow.
>>     But, if skb->protocol = 0, no matter what type of packet it is, it
>> will be discarded directly in ipvlan_process_outbound().
>> So net branch will be OK? What I missed?
>> Thanks.
> 
> This never worked, and nobody ever claimed it has ever worked: this is
> a new functionality.
> 
> net-next seems appropriate to me.
> 
> It seems that skb->protocol == 0 is only used by fuzzers, or careless
> applications ?
  Yes. I will send v3.
Thanks.

Zhengchao Shao