From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Cyrus-Session-Id: sloti22d1t05-2055499-1519754227-2-18287996956291412642 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 3.0 X-Spam-known-sender: no X-Spam-score: 0.0 X-Spam-hits: BAYES_00 -1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN 0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM 0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS 0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI -5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.01, LANGUAGES en, BAYES_USED global, SA_VERSION 3.4.0 X-Spam-source: IP='209.132.180.67', Host='vger.kernel.org', Country='CN', FromHeader='com', MailFrom='org' X-Spam-charsets: cc='UTF-8', plain='UTF-8' X-Resolved-to: greg@kroah.com X-Delivered-to: greg@kroah.com X-Mail-from: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; d=messagingengine.com; s=arctest; t=1519754226; b=WjDGuCRl/xWVhHBUi3ATzYQsepgNHrKXBVVUe4xV9ZCDfwV 3leWfzQ5TNZT3fpRBucRndN6KquB3w3IFWExLHDtDm/Lwnf6k5QMvh5ck0jvxQeN /MYp93u9xlAE1qOCculXDDaxMloSSbx1RB7LVkEat71OAqLIKpjZIbxgkuGGtjxV E59RZiC0aHhPmnZt8OGmrllAtY8N8XOvWa2lrNPHO2aHYC0wMocAIQtk4xt0sbU2 03z2eBG4FZLKHof+a1GVD+qxkfvOZ5DcQvsJjx1nxxsWQa1QfQbPnefWDflnH22T GFqLCVTvzkhbO7jiqzYoihQ9SrS+YS81lSZE0MA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:sender:list-id; s= arctest; t=1519754226; bh=9N8zFvYveCStxtK4GXLXAo1viVDUeQgY9TvZmT TGzq0=; b=kqDkXIACwtz95hoZG7azHlEhE+eVy5sMeLvXdpr0a68EK+S0kN6S2M zP0K25Z+NCND/qLKgRtyQ1VN/CuWqHSBP302g+TD5/KAzNA8B+E+GVndCAbElbVw T/LRH2BnbMM2JeSfnZORQt50+9xMnsyOQTF1gfUbPoULL9Q6hDTbaw4n2xqPauej dIUqi/ioRxQN4A/RmfM/aGJ+CaxxbIc8ldT0hWzhVRHbflJLHB4oEA5saLi8g0rT 73x7HG3qKXLVWJWFHUSCPOEj9QmnKdguBvNfoAhQAYJWyLrSzLEiyniqyY3XXR50 pf7DlRRURALuoBv0v9cCGH7Re7BpMoUA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx3.messagingengine.com; arc=none (no signatures found); dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key sha256) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=KPyc/aQS x-bits=2048 x-keytype=rsa x-algorithm=sha256 x-selector=20161025; dmarc=pass (p=none,has-list-id=yes,d=none) header.from=gmail.com; iprev=pass policy.iprev=209.132.180.67 (vger.kernel.org); spf=none smtp.mailfrom=stable-owner@vger.kernel.org smtp.helo=vger.kernel.org; x-aligned-from=fail; x-google-dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key) header.d=1e100.net header.i=@1e100.net header.b=Gx0cSGRc; x-ptr=pass x-ptr-helo=vger.kernel.org x-ptr-lookup=vger.kernel.org; x-return-mx=pass smtp.domain=vger.kernel.org smtp.result=pass smtp_org.domain=kernel.org smtp_org.result=pass smtp_is_org_domain=no header.domain=gmail.com header.result=pass header_is_org_domain=yes Authentication-Results: mx3.messagingengine.com; arc=none (no signatures found); dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key sha256) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=KPyc/aQS x-bits=2048 x-keytype=rsa x-algorithm=sha256 x-selector=20161025; dmarc=pass (p=none,has-list-id=yes,d=none) header.from=gmail.com; iprev=pass policy.iprev=209.132.180.67 (vger.kernel.org); spf=none smtp.mailfrom=stable-owner@vger.kernel.org smtp.helo=vger.kernel.org; x-aligned-from=fail; x-google-dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key) header.d=1e100.net header.i=@1e100.net header.b=Gx0cSGRc; x-ptr=pass x-ptr-helo=vger.kernel.org x-ptr-lookup=vger.kernel.org; x-return-mx=pass smtp.domain=vger.kernel.org smtp.result=pass smtp_org.domain=kernel.org smtp_org.result=pass smtp_is_org_domain=no header.domain=gmail.com header.result=pass header_is_org_domain=yes Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751464AbeB0R5D (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:57:03 -0500 Received: from mail-pl0-f68.google.com ([209.85.160.68]:44814 "EHLO mail-pl0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751117AbeB0R5C (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:57:02 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELt9uVnzaC2c8cJuo9dSbxpdPs+kcv1frFrsIg6YpDkysR+1iT1U0WCmrstzUgCqvvEdFJH0l9Aj/rveHmf/LV0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6bca5a97-f581-86b8-12ad-77147619d519@csail.mit.edu> References: <20171031095530.520746935@linuxfoundation.org> <20171031095531.633196173@linuxfoundation.org> <97340c9a-0ea2-0d3d-cf26-58c799d76cae@mageia.org> <20171101151803.GB31285@kroah.com> <4ba67095-4075-688f-d3fb-157847aee4d9@csail.mit.edu> <28ffc363-5140-5685-d288-6e3dc07c6369@csail.mit.edu> <20180227085428.GA16879@kroah.com> <20180227124050.GB31888@kroah.com> <6bca5a97-f581-86b8-12ad-77147619d519@csail.mit.edu> From: Steve French Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:56:41 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.13 28/43] SMB3: Validate negotiate request must always be signed To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Thomas Backlund , =?UTF-8?Q?Aur=C3=A9lien_Aptel?= , LKML , Stable , Ronnie Sahlberg , Pavel Shilovskiy , CIFS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This shouldn't be too hard to figure out if willing to backport a slightly larger set of fixes to the older stable, but I don't have a system running 4.9 stable. Is this the correct stable tree branch? https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/log/?h=linux-4.9.y On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > On 2/27/18 4:40 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:22:31AM -0800, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >>> On 2/27/18 12:54 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 07:44:28PM -0800, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >>>>> On 1/3/18 6:15 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >>>>>> On 11/1/17 8:18 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 03:02:11PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote: >>>>>>>> Den 31.10.2017 kl. 11:55, skrev Greg Kroah-Hartman: >>>>>>>>> 4.13-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: Steve French >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> commit 4587eee04e2ac7ac3ac9fa2bc164fb6e548f99cd upstream. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> According to MS-SMB2 3.2.55 validate_negotiate request must >>>>>>>>> always be signed. Some Windows can fail the request if you send it unsigned >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> See kernel bugzilla bug 197311 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Acked-by: Ronnie Sahlberg >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Steve French >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c | 3 +++ >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -1963,6 +1963,9 @@ SMB2_ioctl(const unsigned int xid, struc >>>>>>>>> } else >>>>>>>>> iov[0].iov_len = get_rfc1002_length(req) + 4; >>>>>>>>> + /* validate negotiate request must be signed - see MS-SMB2 3.2.5.5 */ >>>>>>>>> + if (opcode == FSCTL_VALIDATE_NEGOTIATE_INFO) >>>>>>>>> + req->hdr.sync_hdr.Flags |= SMB2_FLAGS_SIGNED; >>>>>>>>> rc = SendReceive2(xid, ses, iov, n_iov, &resp_buftype, flags, &rsp_iov); >>>>>>>>> cifs_small_buf_release(req); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This one needs to be backported to all stable kernels as the commit that >>>>>>>> introduced the regression: >>>>>>>> ' >>>>>>>> 0603c96f3af50e2f9299fa410c224ab1d465e0f9 >>>>>>>> SMB: Validate negotiate (to protect against downgrade) even if signing off >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> is backported in stable trees as of: 4.9.53, 4.4.90, 3.18.73 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Oh wait, it breaks the builds on older kernels, that's why I didn't >>>>>>> apply it :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can you provide me with a working backport? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there a version of this fix available for stable kernels? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Greg, >>>>> >>>>> Mounting SMB3 shares continues to fail for me on 4.4.118 and 4.9.84 >>>>> due to the issues that I have described in detail on this mail thread. >>>>> >>>>> Since there is no apparent fix for this bug on stable kernels, could >>>>> you please consider reverting the original commit that caused this >>>>> regression? >>>>> >>>>> That commit was intended to enhance security, which is probably why it >>>>> was backported to stable kernels in the first place; but instead it >>>>> ends up breaking basic functionality itself (mounting). So in the >>>>> absence of a proper fix, I don't see much of an option but to revert >>>>> that commit. >>>>> >>>>> So, please consider reverting the following: >>>>> >>>>> commit 02ef29f9cbb616bf419 "SMB: Validate negotiate (to protect >>>>> against downgrade) even if signing off" on 4.4.118 >>>>> >>>>> commit 0e1b85a41a25ac888fb "SMB: Validate negotiate (to protect >>>>> against downgrade) even if signing off" on 4.9.84 >>>>> >>>>> They correspond to commit 0603c96f3af50e2f9299fa410c224ab1d465e0f9 >>>>> upstream. Both these patches should revert cleanly. >>>> >>>> Do you still have this same problem on 4.14 and 4.15? If so, the issue >>>> needs to get fixed there, not papered-over by reverting these old >>>> changes, as you will hit the issue again in the future when you update >>>> to a newer kernel version. >>>> >>> >>> 4.14 and 4.15 work great! (I had mentioned this is in my original bug >>> report but forgot to summarize it here, sorry). >> >> >> Then what is the bugfix that should be applied here in order to keep >> things working with these patches applied? >> > > That would be the one mentioned in the subject line of this thread :) > However, a working backport of that fix is not available for 4.4 and > 4.9, hence the trouble. > > It looks like we are reconstructing elements of this email thread all > over again, so let me quickly summarize the status so far: > > In 4.14/4.15/mainline, > - commit 0603c96f3af50e2f9 (SMB: Validate negotiate (to protect against > downgrade) even if signing off) caused mount regression with SMB v3. > > - commit 4587eee04e2ac7ac3 (SMB3: Validate negotiate request must > always be signed) fixed the issue. > > - [ There was a lot of code churn in the CIFS/SMB codebase between > these two commits in mainline. ] > > In this email thread, you backported the fix to stable 4.13. Thomas > noticed that the problematic commit had also made it to stable series > such as 4.4 and 4.9, and requested a backport of the fix to those > trees as well. However, a straight-forward backport of the fix to 4.4 > and 4.9 breaks the build, so no fix was available for those kernels. > > I investigated this and tried to produce a working backport of the fix > to 4.4 and 4.9, but didn't succeed, despite trying several variations > as well as suggestions from Aurelien [1][2]. So, given that there is > still no known fix for the mount regression on 4.4 and 4.9 stable > series at this point, I decided to request a revert of the problematic > commit that caused the regression in those kernels. > > [1]. https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/3/892 > [2]. https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/29/1009 > > Regards, > Srivatsa -- Thanks, Steve