From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: tom@herbertland.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, kafai@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: Implement limits on hop by hop and destination options
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:38:47 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170512.113847.1389407948502066394.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1494451999-19031-1-git-send-email-tom@herbertland.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 14:33:19 -0700
> RFC 2460 (IPv6) defines hop by hop options and destination options
> extension headers. Both of these carry a list of TLVs which is
> only limited by the maximum length of the extension header (2048
> bytes). By the spec a host must process all the TLVs in these
> options, however these could be used as a fairly obvious
> denial of service attack. I think this could in fact be
> a significant DOS vector on the Internet, one mitigating
> factor might be that many FWs drop all packets with EH (and
> obviously this is only IPv6) so an Internet wide attack might not
> be so effective (yet!).
>
> By my calculation, the worse case packet with TLVs in a standard
> 1500 byte MTU packet that would be processed by the stack contains
> 1282 invidual TLVs (including pad TLVS) or 724 two byte TLVs. I
> wrote a quick test program that floods a whole bunch of these
> packets to a host and sure enough there is substantial time spent
> in ip6_parse_tlv. These packets contain nothing but unknown TLVS
> (that are ignored), TLV padding, and bogus UDP header with zero
> payload length.
...
> Default values are set to 8 for options counts, and set to INT_MAX
> for maximum length. Note the choice to limit options to 8 is an
> arbitrary guess (roughly based on the fact that the stack supports
> three HBH options and just one destination option).
So the maximum number of TLVs we could process is some function of the
option count limit, and the number of padding TLVs that can be stuffed
alongside of those 8 non-padding options?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-12 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-10 21:33 [PATCH net-next] ipv6: Implement limits on hop by hop and destination options Tom Herbert
2017-05-12 15:38 ` David Miller [this message]
2017-05-13 1:02 ` Tom Herbert
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=20170512.113847.1389407948502066394.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom@herbertland.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).