[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFUGeu3AeWSLfwHt@gauss3.secunet.de>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:58:02 +0200
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To: Aakash Kumar S <saakashkumar@...vell.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
<pabeni@...hat.com>, <horms@...nel.org>, <akamaluddin@...vell.com>,
<antony@...nome.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfrm: Duplicate SPI Handling
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 03:36:21PM +0530, Aakash Kumar S wrote:
> The issue originates when Strongswan initiates an XFRM_MSG_ALLOCSPI
> Netlink message, which triggers the kernel function xfrm_alloc_spi().
> This function is expected to ensure uniqueness of the Security Parameter
> Index (SPI) for inbound Security Associations (SAs). However, it can
> return success even when the requested SPI is already in use, leading
> to duplicate SPIs assigned to multiple inbound SAs, differentiated
> only by their destination addresses.
>
> This behavior causes inconsistencies during SPI lookups for inbound packets.
> Since the lookup may return an arbitrary SA among those with the same SPI,
> packet processing can fail, resulting in packet drops.
>
> According to RFC 4301 section 4.4.2 , for inbound processing a unicast SA
> is uniquely identified by the SPI and optionally protocol.
>
> Reproducing the Issue Reliably:
> To consistently reproduce the problem, restrict the available SPI range in
> charon.conf : spi_min = 0x10000000 spi_max = 0x10000002
> This limits the system to only 2 usable SPI values.
> Next, create more than 2 Child SA. each using unique pair of src/dst address.
> As soon as the 3rd Child SA is initiated, it will be assigned a duplicate
> SPI, since the SPI pool is already exhausted.
> With a narrow SPI range, the issue is consistently reproducible.
> With a broader/default range, it becomes rare and unpredictable.
>
> Current implementation:
> xfrm_spi_hash() lookup function computes hash using daddr, proto, and family.
> So if two SAs have the same SPI but different destination addresses, then
> they will:
> a. Hash into different buckets
> b. Be stored in different linked lists (byspi + h)
> c. Not be seen in the same hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() iteration.
> As a result, the lookup will result in NULL and kernel allows that Duplicate SPI
>
> Proposed Change:
> xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto() does a truly global search - across all states,
> regardless of hash bucket and matches SPI and proto.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aakash Kumar S <saakashkumar@...vell.com>
Nit: Please remove the leading whitespaces from the commit message
so that I don't have to hand edit it when applying.
> ---
> include/net/xfrm.h | 3 +++
> net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/xfrm.h b/include/net/xfrm.h
> index 39365fd2ea17..bd128980e8fd 100644
> --- a/include/net/xfrm.h
> +++ b/include/net/xfrm.h
> @@ -1693,6 +1693,9 @@ struct xfrm_state *xfrm_stateonly_find(struct net *net, u32 mark, u32 if_id,
> u8 mode, u8 proto, u32 reqid);
> struct xfrm_state *xfrm_state_lookup_byspi(struct net *net, __be32 spi,
> unsigned short family);
> +struct xfrm_state *xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto(struct net *net, __be32 spi,
> + u8 proto);
> +
> int xfrm_state_check_expire(struct xfrm_state *x);
> void xfrm_state_update_stats(struct net *net);
> #ifdef CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
> index 341d79ecb5c2..9820025610ee 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
> @@ -1714,6 +1714,29 @@ struct xfrm_state *xfrm_state_lookup_byspi(struct net *net, __be32 spi,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(xfrm_state_lookup_byspi);
>
> +struct xfrm_state *xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto(struct net *net, __be32 spi, u8 proto)
> +{
> + struct xfrm_state *x;
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +
> + for (i = 0; i <= net->xfrm.state_hmask; i++) {
> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(x, &net->xfrm.state_byspi[i], byspi) {
> + if (x->id.spi == spi && x->id.proto == proto) {
> + if (!xfrm_state_hold_rcu(x))
> + continue;
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return x;
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto);
Do we really need to export this function? It is used just
in net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
Powered by blists - more mailing lists