netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net/tcp: Don't consider TCP_CLOSE in TCP_AO

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: <20240601121457.GI491852@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 13:14:57 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: 0x7f454c46@...il.com
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net/tcp: Don't consider TCP_CLOSE in
 TCP_AO_ESTABLISHED

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 06:29:32PM +0100, Dmitry Safonov via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>
> 
> TCP_CLOSE may or may not have current/rnext keys and should not be
> considered "established". The fast-path for TCP_CLOSE is
> SKB_DROP_REASON_TCP_CLOSE. This is what tcp_rcv_state_process() does
> anyways. Add an early drop path to not spend any time verifying
> segment signatures for sockets in TCP_CLOSE state.
> 
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v6.7
> Fixes: 0a3a809089eb ("net/tcp: Verify inbound TCP-AO signed segments")
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>

...

> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_ao.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_ao.c
> index 781b67a52571..37c42b63ff99 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_ao.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_ao.c
> @@ -933,6 +933,7 @@ tcp_inbound_ao_hash(struct sock *sk, const struct sk_buff *skb,
>  	struct tcp_ao_key *key;
>  	__be32 sisn, disn;
>  	u8 *traffic_key;
> +	int state;
>  	u32 sne = 0;

Hi Dimitry,

It's probably not a good reason to respon this patch, but if you do make a
v2 for some other reason, please consider reverse xmas tree order -
longest line to shortest for local variable declarations - here.

I'll leave actual review of this patch to others.

...