On 15.11.2024 16:13, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
On 09/11/2024 02:11, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
On 29.10.2024 12:47, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
An ovpn interface will keep carrier always on and let the user
decide when an interface should be considered disconnected.
This way, even if an ovpn interface is not connected to any peer,
it can still retain all IPs and routes and thus prevent any data
leak.
Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/ovpn/main.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ovpn/main.c b/drivers/net/ovpn/main.c
index
eead7677b8239eb3c48bb26ca95492d88512b8d4..eaa83a8662e4ac2c758201008268f9633643c0b6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ovpn/main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ovpn/main.c
@@ -31,6 +31,13 @@ static void ovpn_struct_free(struct net_device *net)
static int ovpn_net_open(struct net_device *dev)
{
+ /* ovpn keeps the carrier always on to avoid losing IP or route
+ * configuration upon disconnection. This way it can prevent leaks
+ * of traffic outside of the VPN tunnel.
+ * The user may override this behaviour by tearing down the
interface
+ * manually.
+ */
+ netif_carrier_on(dev);
If a user cares about the traffic leaking, then he can create a
blackhole route with huge metric:
# ip route add blackhole default metric 10000
Why the network interface should implicitly provide this
functionality? And on another hand, how a routing daemon can learn a
topology change without indication from the interface?
This was discussed loooong ago with Andrew. Here my last response:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/d896bbd8-2709-4834-a637-
f982fc51fc57@xxxxxxxxxxx/
Thank you for sharing the link to the beginning of the conversation.
Till the moment we have 3 topics regarding the operational state indication:
1. possible absence of a conception of running state,
2. influence on routing protocol implementations,
3. traffic leaking.
As for conception of the running state, it should exists for tunneling
protocols with a state tracking. In this specific case, we can assume
interface running when it has configured peer with keys. The protocol
even has nice feature for the connection monitoring - keepalive.
Routing protocols on one hand could benefit from the operational state
indication. On another hand, hello/hold timer values mentioned in the
documentation are comparable with default routing protocols timers. So,
actual improvement is debatable.
Regarding the traffic leading, as I mentioned before, the blackhole
route or a firewall rule works better then implicit blackholing with a
non-running interface.
Long story short, I agree that we might not need a real operational
state indication now. Still protecting from a traffic leaking is not
good enough justification.
Andrew, what do you think? Is the traffic leaking prevention any good
justification or it needs to be updated?
--
Sergey
