netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4] tcp: Dump bound-only sockets in inet

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: <CANn89iLHxopRpEoUdypAS7hvth26JPg3P6u9rCnQthVeCnbC+w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 13:31:27 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>
Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>, davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, 
	kuba@...nel.org, mkubecek@...e.cz, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4] tcp: Dump bound-only sockets in inet_diag.

On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 11:58 AM Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 09:41:16PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:34 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>
> >
> > > > +                                             goto next_bind;
> > > > +
> > > > +                                     if (sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSE ||
> > > > +                                         !inet->inet_num)
> > >
> > > Sorry for missing this in the previous version, but I think
> > > inet_num is always non-zero because 0 selects a port automatically
> > > and the min of ipv4_local_port_range is 1.
> > >
> >
> > This is not true, because it can be cleared by another thread, before
> > unhashing happens in __inet_put_port()
> >
> > Note the test should use READ_ONCE(inet->inet_num), but I did not
> > mention this, as many reads of inet_num are racy.
>
> Would you like me to send a v5, or do you prefer to let a future series
> fix all the racy reads and writes at once?
>
> Personally, I feel it'd look strange to have a READ_ONCE() only in
> inet_diag_dump_icsk(), while the rest of the stack accesses it
> directly. But just let me know if you feel otherwise and I'll post a
> v5.

I gave my Reviewed-by: tag for V4, because the READ_ONCE() issues are
orthogonal.

I do not think a V5 is needed.