On 2018/8/16 14:16, Michal Kubecek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:50:01AM +0800, Mao Wenan wrote: >> There are five patches to fix CVE-2018-5390 in latest mainline >> branch, but only two patches exist in stable 4.4 and 3.18: >> dc6ae4d tcp: detect malicious patterns in tcp_collapse_ofo_queue() >> 5fbec48 tcp: avoid collapses in tcp_prune_queue() if possible >> I have tested with stable 4.4 kernel, and found the cpu usage was very high. >> So I think only two patches can't fix the CVE-2018-5390. >> test results: >> with fix patch： 78.2% ksoftirqd >> withoutfix patch： 90% ksoftirqd >> >> Then I try to imitate 72cd43ba(tcp: free batches of packets in tcp_prune_ofo_queue()) >> to drop at least 12.5 % of sk_rcvbuf to avoid malicious attacks with simple queue >> instead of RB tree. The result is not very well. >> >> After analysing the codes of stable 4.4, and debuging the >> system, shows that search of ofo_queue(tcp ofo using a simple queue) cost more cycles. >> >> So I try to backport "tcp: use an RB tree for ooo receive queue" using RB tree >> instead of simple queue, then backport Eric Dumazet 5 fixed patches in mainline, >> good news is that ksoftirqd is turn to about 20%, which is the same with mainline now. >> >> Stable 4.4 have already back port two patches, >> f4a3313d(tcp: avoid collapses in tcp_prune_queue() if possible) >> 3d4bf93a(tcp: detect malicious patterns in tcp_collapse_ofo_queue()) >> If we want to change simple queue to RB tree to finally resolve, we should apply previous >> patch 9f5afeae(tcp: use an RB tree for ooo receive queue.) firstly, but 9f5afeae have many >> conflicts with 3d4bf93a and f4a3313d, which are part of patch series from Eric in >> mainline to fix CVE-2018-5390, so I need revert part of patches in stable 4.4 firstly, >> then apply 9f5afeae, and reapply five patches from Eric. > > There seems to be an obvious mistake in one of the backports. Could you > check the results with Takashi's follow-up fix submitted at > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180815095846.7734-1-tiwai@xxxxxxx > > (I would try myself but you don't mention what test you ran.) I have backport RB tree in stable 4.4, function tcp_collapse_ofo_queue() has been refined, which keep the same with mainline, so it seems no problem when apply Eric's patch 3d4bf93a(tcp: detect malicious patterns in tcp_collapse_ofo_queue()). I also noticed that range_truesize != head->truesize will be always false which mentioned in your URL, but this only based on stable 4.4's codes, If I applied RB tree's patch 9f5afeae(tcp: use an RB tree for ooo receive queue), and after apply 3d4bf93a,the codes should be range_truesize += skb->truesize, and range_truesize != head->truesize can be true. One POC programm(named smack-for-ficora) is to send large out of order packets to existed tcp link, and check the cpu usage of the system with top command. > > Michal Kubecek > > . >
