On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:02 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 09:12:06PM +0100, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
> > The authorize reply can be empty, for example when the ticket used to
> > build the authorizer is too old and TAG_BADAUTHORIZER is returned from
> > the service. Calling ->verify_authorizer_reply() results in an attempt
> > to decrypt and validate (somewhat) random data in au->buf (most likely
> > the signature block from calc_signature()), which fails and ends up in
> > con_fault_finish() with !con->auth_retry. The ticket isn't invalidated
> > and the connection is retried again and again until a new ticket is
> > obtained from the monitor:
> >
> > libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
> > libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
> > libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
> > libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
> >
> > Let TAG_BADAUTHORIZER handler kick in and increment con->auth_retry.
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Fixes: 5c056fdc5b47 ("libceph: verify authorize reply on connect")
> > Link: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20164
> > Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > [idryomov@xxxxxxxxx: backport to 4.4: extra arg, no CEPHX_V2]
> > ---
> > net/ceph/messenger.c | 12 ++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> What is the git commit id of this patch in Linus's tree?
Commit 0fd3fd0a9bb0b02b6435bb7070e9f7b82a23f068 upstream.
Thanks,
Ilya
