From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Subject: Re: What basic sanity checking on packet headers is done
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:50:01 +0200
Message-ID: <451D4EB9.2020905@trash.net>
References: <451D47E5.7000108@positivenetworks.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org
Return-path: <netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org>
To: Wayne Schroeder <raz@positivenetworks.net>
In-Reply-To: <451D47E5.7000108@positivenetworks.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter-devel>,
	<mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: </pipermail/netfilter-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter-devel>,
	<mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org

Wayne Schroeder wrote:
> I've written a new target module that uses the ip header fields of ihl
> and tot_len for offsets into the packets.  How safe is the data in the
> ip headers?  Is there sanity checking when the packet is received off
> the wire... for instance -- is it safe to assume in the prerouting chain
> of the mangle table that tot_len will not put me past the memory
> allocated for the packet?  Same goes for ihl?

Check out ip_rcv() in ip_input.c. ihl and tot_len are _usually_ valid
within netfilter. The only exception is raw sockets, on the outgoing
hooks the only guarantee is that ihl * 4 >= sizeof(struct iphdr) (
only for ip_tables, see iptable_filter.c). We could consider providing
stricter guarantees, I'm pretty sure some modules only perform
insufficient checks.