From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jiri@resnulli.us, victor@mojatatu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net/sched: reset conntrack after packet munging
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 14:09:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aobuk1osK-Lq-aMk@strlen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM0EoMnvz6A_v65s=jcdw5nxL6N2+yd7ZBvp78mtt7edkPe-sw@mail.gmail.com>
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> wrote:
> Example: If the ebpf one could be reproduced with unshare -urn would
> it have been fine to make the fix sit in netfilter?
I don't know how to 'fix netfilter'. We would have to remove skb->nfct
and re-parse at every turn. Is that a viable option...? Don't think so.
> > And that doesn't solve BPF (can sit anywhere) or OVS (no idea here if
> > its affected or not).
>
> OVS is very likely affected.
> I saw your other email and you are the expert, but I am itchy to try
> the nf_confirm() approach.
> At minimal it should fix the PoC imo.
As I said, I don't see any existing function that could be used
to add the required re-validation. nf_confirm() is the last step
in the pipeline, its way too late. nf_conntrack_in() doesn't work
either because you can install matches earlier than that, e.g. via
-t raw -m conntrack in classic iptables, or via 'hook prerouting
type filter priority -2147483647' or something like that in
nftables.
The only other option is playing whack-a-mole, accepting the original
proposed patch for nft_ct, but I can already tell this will not be
enough and revalidation will have to be added everywhere.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-20 12:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-19 20:42 [PATCH net 0/4] net/sched: reset conntrack after packet munging Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 1/4] selftests/tc-testing: pass mp_pm via initialiser Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 2/4] net/sched: act_pedit: drop conntrack on network/transport header changes Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 3/4] selftests: tc-testing: add act_ct test for ct reset handling Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 4/4] net/sched: act_nat: discard any conntrack entry post modification Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 11:09 ` [PATCH net 0/4] net/sched: reset conntrack after packet munging Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 11:32 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 11:44 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 11:42 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 11:58 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 12:09 ` Florian Westphal [this message]
2026-08-20 12:41 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 13:10 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 16:54 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 17:37 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 19:02 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
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=aobuk1osK-Lq-aMk@strlen.de \
--to=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=victor@mojatatu.com \
/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.