From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Lukas Tribus <lists@ltri.eu>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
Mohandass Roobesh <Roobesh_Mohandass@mcafee.com>,
Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: : getsockopt(fd, SOL_IP, SO_ORIGINAL_DST, sa, &salen) is in fact sometimes returning the source IP instead the destination IP
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 17:04:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190112160400.dblitzk2ftlfzryd@breakpoint.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2e83651c-df8b-8341-4170-df328e3d756a@ltri.eu>
Lukas Tribus <lists@ltri.eu> wrote:
> The application (haproxy) needs to know the original destination IP
> address, however it does not know whether -j REDIRECT was used or not.
> Because of this the application always queries SO_ORIGINAL_DST, and
> this includes configurations without -j REDIRECT.
>
> Are you saying the behavior of SO_ORIGINAL_DST is undefined when not
> used with -j REDIRECT and that this issue does not happen when -j
> REDIRECT is actually used?
No, thats not what I said. Because OP provided a link that mentions
TPROXY, I concluded OP was using TPROXY, so I pointed out that the
error source can be completely avoided by not using SO_ORIGINAL_DST.
As I said, SO_ORIGINAL_DST returns the dst address of
the original direction *as seen by conntrack*.
In case REDIRECT or DNAT was used, the address returned is the on-wire
one, before DNAT rewrite took place.
Therefore, SO_ORIGINAL_DST is only needed when REDIRECT or DNAT was
used. If no DNAT rewrite takes place, sockaddr returned by accept or
getsockname can be used directly and SO_ORIGINAL_DST isn't needed.
The returned address should be identical to the one given by accept().
If SO_ORIGINAL_DST returns the reply, then conntrack picked up
a reply packet as the first packet of the connection, so it believes
originator is the responder and vice versa.
One case where this can happen is when nf_conntrack_tcp_loose
(mid-stream pickup) is enabled.
This is not a haproxy bug.
Only thing that haproxy could is to provide a knob to make it only
use addresses returned by accept, rather than relying on
SO_ORIGINAL_DST for those that use TPROXY to do MITM interception.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Lukas Tribus <lists@ltri.eu>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
Mohandass Roobesh <Roobesh_Mohandass@mcafee.com>,
Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [NETDEV]: getsockopt(fd, SOL_IP, SO_ORIGINAL_DST, sa, &salen) is in fact sometimes returning the source IP instead the destination IP
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 17:04:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190112160400.dblitzk2ftlfzryd@breakpoint.cc> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190112160400.pgAYI78lJl2Blv-D58BgUSvqMoueczgvbscl4lgxv_0@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2e83651c-df8b-8341-4170-df328e3d756a@ltri.eu>
Lukas Tribus <lists@ltri.eu> wrote:
> The application (haproxy) needs to know the original destination IP
> address, however it does not know whether -j REDIRECT was used or not.
> Because of this the application always queries SO_ORIGINAL_DST, and
> this includes configurations without -j REDIRECT.
>
> Are you saying the behavior of SO_ORIGINAL_DST is undefined when not
> used with -j REDIRECT and that this issue does not happen when -j
> REDIRECT is actually used?
No, thats not what I said. Because OP provided a link that mentions
TPROXY, I concluded OP was using TPROXY, so I pointed out that the
error source can be completely avoided by not using SO_ORIGINAL_DST.
As I said, SO_ORIGINAL_DST returns the dst address of
the original direction *as seen by conntrack*.
In case REDIRECT or DNAT was used, the address returned is the on-wire
one, before DNAT rewrite took place.
Therefore, SO_ORIGINAL_DST is only needed when REDIRECT or DNAT was
used. If no DNAT rewrite takes place, sockaddr returned by accept or
getsockname can be used directly and SO_ORIGINAL_DST isn't needed.
The returned address should be identical to the one given by accept().
If SO_ORIGINAL_DST returns the reply, then conntrack picked up
a reply packet as the first packet of the connection, so it believes
originator is the responder and vice versa.
One case where this can happen is when nf_conntrack_tcp_loose
(mid-stream pickup) is enabled.
This is not a haproxy bug.
Only thing that haproxy could is to provide a knob to make it only
use addresses returned by accept, rather than relying on
SO_ORIGINAL_DST for those that use TPROXY to do MITM interception.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-12 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <MWHPR16MB1502549F7BAAE102EF1D5DF4EDB50@MWHPR16MB1502.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
[not found] ` <MWHPR16MB150233EF69CFD4562BFA65ABEDB60@MWHPR16MB1502.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
[not found] ` <MWHPR16MB1502DC55542EBA8121631B16EDB20@MWHPR16MB1502.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
2018-12-31 6:20 ` : getsockopt(fd, SOL_IP, SO_ORIGINAL_DST, sa, &salen) is in fact sometimes returning the source IP instead the destination IP Mohandass, Roobesh
2019-01-07 11:17 ` Florian Westphal
2019-01-07 14:57 ` Mohandass, Roobesh
2019-01-12 14:37 ` Lukas Tribus
2019-01-12 14:37 ` [NETDEV]: " Lukas Tribus
2019-01-12 16:04 ` Florian Westphal [this message]
2019-01-12 16:04 ` Florian Westphal
2019-01-12 17:26 ` : " Willy Tarreau
2019-01-12 17:26 ` [NETDEV]: " Willy Tarreau
2019-01-12 18:01 ` : " Lukas Tribus
2019-01-12 18:01 ` [NETDEV]: " Lukas Tribus
2019-01-12 18:33 ` : " Willy Tarreau
2019-01-12 18:33 ` [NETDEV]: " Willy Tarreau
2019-01-17 5:23 ` Mohandass, Roobesh
2019-01-23 8:07 ` Mohandass, Roobesh
2019-01-23 8:54 ` Willy Tarreau
[not found] ` <MWHPR16MB1502A336CCB4EF3F0FCB69ECEDB20@MWHPR16MB1502.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
2019-01-07 7:58 ` : " Mohandass, Roobesh
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=20190112160400.dblitzk2ftlfzryd@breakpoint.cc \
--to=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=Roobesh_Mohandass@mcafee.com \
--cc=lists@ltri.eu \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/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).