Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> [...]
> > resurrect an old patch from Pablo Neira to remove the untracked objects.
>
> Thanks for doing so :)
>
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_conntrack_common.h b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_conntrack_common.h
> > index 6a8e33dd4ecb..b4a0a1940118 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_conntrack_common.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_conntrack_common.h
> > @@ -28,12 +28,14 @@ enum ip_conntrack_info {
> > /* only for userspace compatibility */
> > #ifndef __KERNEL__
> > IP_CT_NEW_REPLY = IP_CT_NUMBER,
> > +#else
> > + IP_CT_UNTRACKED = 7,
>
> This seems to be exposed via nfnetlink_queue conntrack support.
Yet another argument for removing this, its a bug.
(missing !nf_ct_is_untracked() check).
Probably should also check !nf_ct_is_template() there.
> > @@ -94,7 +96,7 @@ enum ip_conntrack_status {
> > IPS_TEMPLATE_BIT = 11,
> > IPS_TEMPLATE = (1 << IPS_TEMPLATE_BIT),
> >
> > - /* Conntrack is a fake untracked entry */
> > + /* Conntrack is a fake untracked entry. Obsolete and not used anymore */
> > IPS_UNTRACKED_BIT = 12,
> > IPS_UNTRACKED = (1 << IPS_UNTRACKED_BIT),
>
> I wonder if we should just set this via ctnetlink, so the interface
> keeps stable. Even if we don't use this bit anymore. These are also
> exposed via ctnetlink CTA_STATUS.
Not following, sorry (still jetlagged).
ctnetlink_new_conntrack() always places the ct into the hashes, so its
not 'untracked'.
Setting and/or changing IPS_UNTRACKED_BIT via ctnetlink should be
disallowed.
Is that what you meant?
--
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
