netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/9] Netfilter updates for net-net

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: <Zw2UgAlqi_Zxaphu@calendula>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:00:32 +0200
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/9] Netfilter updates for net-net

On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 11:09:25PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > 5) Use kfree_rcu() instead of call_rcu() + kmem_cache_free(), from Julia Lawall.
> > 
> > Hi! Are you seeing any failures in nft_audit? I haven't looked closely
> > but it seems that this PR causes: 
> > 
> > <snip>
> > # testing for cmd: nft reset quotas t1 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft reset quotas t2 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft reset quotas ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft delete rule t1 c1 handle 4 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft delete rule t1 c1 handle 5; delete rule t1 c1 handle 6 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft flush chain t1 c2 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft flush table t2 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft delete chain t2 c2 ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft delete element t1 s { 22 } ... OK
> > # testing for cmd: nft delete element t1 s { 80, 443 } ... FAIL
> > # -table=t1 family=2 entries=2 op=nft_unregister_setelem
> > # +table=t1 family=2 entries=1 op=nft_unregister_setelem
> > # testing for cmd: nft flush set t1 s2 ... FAIL
> 
> My fault, Pablo, please toss all of my patches.
> 
> I do not know when I will resend, so do not wait.

At quick glance, I can see the audit logic is based in transaction
objects, so now it counts one single entry for the two elements in one
single transaction. I can look into this to fix this.

Florian, are you seing any other issues apart for this miscount?

Thanks.