Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, zhiyunq@umich.edu, nanditad@google.com,
	ncardwell@google.com, john.dykstra1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: should drop incoming frames without ACK flag set
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:44:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1356561874.20133.21098.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121226.141154.115080358245263295.davem@davemloft.net>

From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

On Wed, 2012-12-26 at 14:11 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:10:01 -0800
> 
> > @@ -5540,6 +5540,9 @@ no_ack:
> >  	}
> >  
> >  slow_path:
> > +	if (!th->ack)
> > +			goto discard;
> 
> One too many tabs there on that last line :-)

Hmm, yes :(

> 
> > +
> >  	if (len < (th->doff << 2) || tcp_checksum_complete_user(sk, skb))
> >  		goto csum_error;
> >  
> > @@ -5551,7 +5554,7 @@ slow_path:
> 
> 
> Also, I would say that this checksum test should come first, because
> that takes priority since you could be testing the ACK bit of a
> corrupted packet.
> 
> Better to get the statistic bump on the bad checksum then a silent
> drop on the ACK being cleared.

Indeed, good catch.

> 
> > @@ -5984,11 +5987,15 @@ int tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
> >  		if (tcp_check_req(sk, skb, req, NULL, true) == NULL)
> >  			goto discard;
> >  	}
> > +
> > +	if (!th->ack)
> > +		goto discard;
> > +
> 
> And that is effectively what is going to happen in this case since
> the caller has already done the checksum checks.
> 

That makes perfect sense.

Thanks !

[PATCH v2] tcp: should drop incoming frames without ACK flag set

In commit 96e0bf4b5193d (tcp: Discard segments that ack data not yet
sent) John Dykstra enforced a check against ack sequences.

In commit 354e4aa391ed5 (tcp: RFC 5961 5.2 Blind Data Injection Attack
Mitigation) I added more safety tests.

But we missed fact that these tests are not performed if ACK bit is
not set.

RFC 793 3.9 mandates TCP should drop a frame without ACK flag set.

" fifth check the ACK field,
      if the ACK bit is off drop the segment and return"

Not doing so permits an attacker to only guess an acceptable sequence
number, evading stronger checks.

Many thanks to Zhiyun Qian for bringing this issue to our attention.

See :
http://web.eecs.umich.edu/~zhiyunq/pub/ccs12_TCP_sequence_number_inference.pdf

Reported-by: Zhiyun Qian <zhiyunq@umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@google.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
Cc: John Dykstra <john.dykstra1@gmail.com>
---
V2: moves the th->ack check after checksum one
 
 net/ipv4/tcp_input.c |   14 ++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
index a136925..a28e4db 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
@@ -5543,6 +5543,9 @@ slow_path:
 	if (len < (th->doff << 2) || tcp_checksum_complete_user(sk, skb))
 		goto csum_error;
 
+	if (!th->ack)
+		goto discard;
+
 	/*
 	 *	Standard slow path.
 	 */
@@ -5551,7 +5554,7 @@ slow_path:
 		return 0;
 
 step5:
-	if (th->ack && tcp_ack(sk, skb, FLAG_SLOWPATH) < 0)
+	if (tcp_ack(sk, skb, FLAG_SLOWPATH) < 0)
 		goto discard;
 
 	/* ts_recent update must be made after we are sure that the packet
@@ -5984,11 +5987,15 @@ int tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 		if (tcp_check_req(sk, skb, req, NULL, true) == NULL)
 			goto discard;
 	}
+
+	if (!th->ack)
+		goto discard;
+
 	if (!tcp_validate_incoming(sk, skb, th, 0))
 		return 0;
 
 	/* step 5: check the ACK field */
-	if (th->ack) {
+	if (true) {
 		int acceptable = tcp_ack(sk, skb, FLAG_SLOWPATH) > 0;
 
 		switch (sk->sk_state) {
@@ -6138,8 +6145,7 @@ int tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 			}
 			break;
 		}
-	} else
-		goto discard;
+	}
 
 	/* ts_recent update must be made after we are sure that the packet
 	 * is in window.

  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-26 22:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-26 17:10 [PATCH] tcp: should drop incoming frames without ACK flag set Eric Dumazet
2012-12-26 22:11 ` David Miller
2012-12-26 22:44   ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2012-12-26 23:09     ` David Miller

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=1356561874.20133.21098.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
    --to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=john.dykstra1@gmail.com \
    --cc=nanditad@google.com \
    --cc=ncardwell@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zhiyunq@umich.edu \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox