All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Kacper Kokot <kacper.kokot.44@gmail.com>
Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, kadlec@netfilter.org,
	fmancera@suse.de, fw@strlen.de, david.laight.linux@gmail.com,
	Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
	coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] netfilter: TCPMSS: fix dropped packets when MSS option is unaligned
Date: Fri, 29 May 2026 00:52:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ahjHRB0Ohn7fpd-o@chamomile> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260528223412.27311-1-kacper.kokot.44@gmail.com>

Hi,

On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 11:34:11PM +0100, Kacper Kokot wrote:
> Padding TCP options with NOPs is optional, so it is legal to send an
> MSS option that is not aligned to a word boundary and therefore not
> aligned for checksum calculation. The current TCPMSS target is not
> robust to this: when the MSS option is unaligned it produces an
> invalid checksum, and the packet is dropped.

Yes, but how many stacks do this?

> This has not been observed in any real environment.

... then why is this a fix?

> Senders place the MSS at the beginning of the options block, where
> it is naturally aligned, but the spec allows unaligned options and
> the kernel shouldn't silently drop legal packets.

This is questionably a "clean packet".

And "the kernel is not silently dropping anything, it is policy that
would drop it", and there are mechanisms to track what rule is
dropping this packet.

> When the changed word is not aligned, the modified bytes straddle two
> checksum words, and using the standard incremental update helper
> (which assumes alignment) produces an invalid checksum:
> 
>     | w1     | w2     |
> OLD |  a  b  |  c  d  |
> NEW |  a  b' |  c' d  |
> 
> Since b' and c' sit across w1 and w2, we could compute the incremental
> checksum in two operations by recalculating w1 and then w2:
> 
>     C' = C - w1 + w1' - w2 + w2'
> 
> But working it out:
> 
>     C' = C - w1 - w2 + w1' + w2'
>        = C - (a * 2^8 + b)  - (c * 2^8 + d)
>            + (a * 2^8 + b') + (c' * 2^8 + d)
>        = C + 2^8 * (a - a + c' - c) + (b' - b + d - d)
>        = C + 2^8 * (c' - c) + (b' - b)
>        = C - (2^8 * c + b) + (2^8 * c' + b')
> 
> So an unaligned incremental checksum can be done in a single operation
> by byteswapping the changed bytes before passing them to the helper.
> This patch implements that trick for unaligned MSS option updates.

If this is a fix as the title specify, there no Fixes: tag?

To me, this qualifies as an enhancement, if anything.

Maybe more correct subject is:

  "netfilter: TCPMSS: handle packets with unaligned MSS option"

since this mangling unaligned MSS has never been supported this far.

Thanks

> Signed-off-by: Kacper Kokot <kacper.kokot.44@gmail.com>
> ---
> I decided to go with the get_unaligned_be16 suggestion because
> it's idiomatic and it produces shorter assembly on x86-64
> (6 instructions vs 9). SYN processing is a cold path so
> I didn't look into it further.
> 
> v2:
>  - Use get_unaligned_be16 (Fernando's suggestion)
>  - Fix alignment check expression (David)
>  - Mention it's a theoretical bug in the commit message
>  - Drop cc stable, the bug is only theoretical
>
>  net/netfilter/xt_TCPMSS.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/xt_TCPMSS.c b/net/netfilter/xt_TCPMSS.c
> index 80e1634bc51f..32c87a520361 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/xt_TCPMSS.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/xt_TCPMSS.c
> @ -117,8 +117,9 @@ tcpmss_mangle_packet(struct sk_buff *skb,
>  	for (i = sizeof(struct tcphdr); i <= tcp_hdrlen - TCPOLEN_MSS; i += optlen(opt, i)) {
>  		if (opt[i] == TCPOPT_MSS && opt[i+1] == TCPOLEN_MSS) {
>  			u_int16_t oldmss;
> +			u16 csum_oldmss, csum_newmss;
>  
> -			oldmss = (opt[i+2] << 8) | opt[i+3];
> +			oldmss = get_unaligned_be16(&opt[i+2]);
>  
>  			/* Never increase MSS, even when setting it, as
>  			 * doing so results in problems for hosts that rely
> @@ -130,8 +131,19 @@ tcpmss_mangle_packet(struct sk_buff *skb,
>  			opt[i+2] = (newmss & 0xff00) >> 8;
>  			opt[i+3] = newmss & 0x00ff;
>  
> +			csum_oldmss = htons(oldmss);
> +			csum_newmss = htons(newmss);
> +
> +			/* MSS may be unaligned; fix up the incremental checksum
> +			 * to avoid an invalid checksum and a dropped packet.
> +			 */
> +			if (((char *)&opt[i + 2] - (char *)tcph) & 0x1) {
> +				csum_oldmss = swab16(csum_oldmss);
> +				csum_newmss = swab16(csum_newmss);
> +			}
> +
>  			inet_proto_csum_replace2(&tcph->check, skb,
> -						 htons(oldmss), htons(newmss),
> +						 csum_oldmss, csum_newmss,
>  						 false);
>  			return 0;
>  		}
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-28 22:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-25 20:11 [PATCH] netfilter: TCPMSS: fix dropped packets when MSS option is unaligned Kacper Kokot
2026-05-25 21:28 ` Florian Westphal
2026-05-25 21:44   ` Kacper Kokot
2026-05-25 22:08   ` Fernando Fernandez Mancera
2026-05-26  9:31     ` David Laight
2026-05-26 13:50 ` kernel test robot
2026-05-26 15:18   ` David Laight
2026-05-26 16:46 ` kernel test robot
2026-05-26 23:21   ` Kacper Kokot
2026-05-28 16:31 ` kernel test robot
2026-05-28 18:11 ` kernel test robot
2026-05-28 19:40   ` David Laight
2026-05-28 22:34     ` [PATCH v2] " Kacper Kokot
2026-05-28 22:52       ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
2026-05-29  7:14       ` Fernando Fernandez Mancera
2026-05-29 20:54 ` [PATCH] " kernel test robot

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ahjHRB0Ohn7fpd-o@chamomile \
    --to=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=fmancera@suse.de \
    --cc=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kacper.kokot.44@gmail.com \
    --cc=kadlec@netfilter.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=phil@nwl.cc \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.