Hi Hannes,
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
<hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mi, 2015-01-07 at 11:11 +0530, Rahul Sharma wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 03:03:20AM +0530, Rahul Sharma wrote:
>> >> ipv6_find_hdr() currently assumes that the next-header field in the
>> >> fragment header of the non-first fragment is the "protocol number of
>> >> the last header" (here last header excludes any extension header
>> >> protocol numbers ) which is incorrect as per RFC2460. The next-header
>> >> value is the first header of the fragmentable part of the original
>> >> packet (which can be extension header as well).
>> >> This can create reassembly problems. For example: Fragmented
>> >> authenticated OSPFv3 packets (where AH header is inserted before the
>> >> protocol header). For the second fragment, the next header value in
>> >> the fragment header will be NEXTHDR_AUTH which is correct but
>> >> ipv6_find_hdr will return ENOENT since AH is an extension header
>> >> resulting in second fragment getting dropped. This check for the
>> >> presence of non-extension header needs to be removed.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Rahul Sharma <rsharma@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >> --- linux-3.18.1/net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c.orig 2015-01-06
>> >> 10:25:36.411419863 -0800
>> >> +++ linux-3.18.1/net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c 2015-01-06
>> >> 10:51:45.819364986 -0800
>> >> @@ -171,10 +171,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ipv6_find_tlv);
>> >> * If the first fragment doesn't contain the final protocol header or
>> >> * NEXTHDR_NONE it is considered invalid.
>> >> *
>> >> - * Note that non-1st fragment is special case that "the protocol number
>> >> - * of last header" is "next header" field in Fragment header. In this case,
>> >> - * *offset is meaningless and fragment offset is stored in *fragoff if fragoff
>> >> - * isn't NULL.
>> >> + * Note that non-1st fragment is special case that "the protocol number of the
>> >> + * first header of the fragmentable part of the original packet" is
>> >> + * "next header" field in the Fragment header. In this case, *offset is
>> >> + * meaningless and fragment offset is stored in *fragoff if fragoff isn't
>> >> + * NULL.
>> >> *
>> >> * if flags is not NULL and it's a fragment, then the frag flag
>> >> * IP6_FH_F_FRAG will be set. If it's an AH header, the
>> >> @@ -250,9 +251,7 @@ int ipv6_find_hdr(const struct sk_buff *
>> >>
>> >> _frag_off = ntohs(*fp) & ~0x7;
>> >> if (_frag_off) {
>> >> - if (target < 0 &&
>> >> - ((!ipv6_ext_hdr(hp->nexthdr)) ||
>> >
>> > This check assumes that the following headers cannot show up in the
>> > fragmented part of the IPv6 packet:
>> >
>> > 12 bool ipv6_ext_hdr(u8 nexthdr)
>> > 13 {
>> > 14 /*
>> > 15 * find out if nexthdr is an extension header or a protocol
>> > 16 */
>> > 17 return (nexthdr == NEXTHDR_HOP) ||
>> > 18 (nexthdr == NEXTHDR_ROUTING) ||
>> > 19 (nexthdr == NEXTHDR_FRAGMENT) ||
>> > 20 (nexthdr == NEXTHDR_AUTH) ||
>> > 21 (nexthdr == NEXTHDR_NONE) ||
>> > 22 (nexthdr == NEXTHDR_DEST);
>> >
>> >> - hp->nexthdr == NEXTHDR_NONE)) {
>> >> + if (target < 0) {
>> >> if (fragoff)
>> >> *fragoff = _frag_off;
>> >> return hp->nexthdr;
>> >> --
>> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>> >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>> I think this is incorrect. Authentication header shows up in the
>> fragmentable part of the original IPv6 packet. So, for the non-first
>> fragments the next-header field value can be NEXTHDR_AUTH.
>
> Pablo's mail got me thinking again.
>
> In general, IPv6 extension headers can appear in any order and stacks
> must be process them. Fragmentation adds a limitation, that some
> extension headers do not make sense and don't have any effect if they
> appear after a fragmentation header (HbH and ROUTING).
>
> Looking at the rest of the function we don't check for HBHHDR or RTHDR
> following a fragmentation header either if we process the first fragment
> (core stack only processes HBH if directly following the ipv6 header
> anyway).
>
> So, in my opinion, it is safe to completely remove this check and it
> would align if the rest of the extension processing logic. The callers
> all seem fine with that.
>
> Pablo, what do you think?
>
> Anyway, the patch does not apply cleanly, the patch header is mangled.
> Could you check and send again?
>
> Thanks,
> Hannes
>
>
I am not sure if replying on the thread with a patch is a good idea
(or should I send a new email). Anyway, let me know if this is works.
Signed-off-by: Rahul Sharma <rsharma@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c b/net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c
index 8af3eb5..5949f87 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/exthdrs_core.c
@@ -171,10 +171,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ipv6_find_tlv);
* If the first fragment doesn't contain the final protocol header or
* NEXTHDR_NONE it is considered invalid.
*
- * Note that non-1st fragment is special case that "the protocol number
- * of last header" is "next header" field in Fragment header. In this case,
- * *offset is meaningless and fragment offset is stored in *fragoff if fragoff
- * isn't NULL.
+ * Note that non-1st fragment is special case that "the protocol number of the
+ * first header of the fragmentable part of the original packet" is
+ * "next header" field in the Fragment header. In this case, *offset is
+ * meaningless and fragment offset is stored in *fragoff if fragoff isn't
+ * NULL.
*
* if flags is not NULL and it's a fragment, then the frag flag
* IP6_FH_F_FRAG will be set. If it's an AH header, the
@@ -250,9 +251,7 @@ int ipv6_find_hdr(const struct sk_buff *skb,
unsigned int *offset,
_frag_off = ntohs(*fp) & ~0x7;
if (_frag_off) {
- if (target < 0 &&
- ((!ipv6_ext_hdr(hp->nexthdr)) ||
- hp->nexthdr == NEXTHDR_NONE)) {
+ if (target < 0) {
if (fragoff)
*fragoff = _frag_off;
return hp->nexthdr;
--
1.7.4.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
