From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, borisp@nvidia.com,
gal@nvidia.com, cratiu@nvidia.com, rrameshbabu@nvidia.com,
steffen.klassert@secunet.com, tariqt@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 01/15] psp: add documentation
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 12:51:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240530125120.24dd7f98@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6657cc86ddf97_37107c29438@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
On Wed, 29 May 2024 20:47:02 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 May 2024 21:24:23 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > There is some value in using the same terminology in the code as in
> > > the spec.
> > >
> > > And the session keys are derived from a key. That is more precise than
> > > state. Specifically, counter-mode KDF from an AES key.
> > >
> > > Perhaps device key, instead of master key?
> >
> > Weak preference towards secret state, but device key works, too.
>
> Totally your choice. I just wanted to make sure this was considered.
Already run the sed, device key it is :)
> > > Consider clarifying the entire state diagram from when one pair
> > > initiates upgrade.
> >
> > Not sure about state diagram, there are only 3 states. Or do you mean
> > extend TCP state diagrams? I think a table may be better:
> >
> > Event | Normal TCP | Rx PSP key present | Tx PSP key present |
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Rx plain text | accept | accept | drop |
> >
> > Rx PSP (good) | drop | accept | accept |
> >
> > Rx PSP (bad) | drop | drop | drop |
> >
> > Tx | plain text | plain text | encrypted * |
> >
> > * data enqueued before Tx key in installed will not be encrypted
> > (either initial send nor retranmissions)
> >
> >
> > What should I add?
>
> I've mostly been concerned about the below edge cases.
>
> If both peers are in TCP_ESTABLISHED for the during of the upgrade,
> and data is aligned on message boundary, things are straightforward.
>
> The retransmit logic is clear, as this is controlled by skb->decrypted
> on the individual skbs on the retransmit queue.
>
> That also solves another edge case: skb geometry changes on retransmit
> (due to different MSS or segs, using tcp_fragment, tso_fragment,
> tcp_retrans_try_collapse, ..) maintain skb->decrypted. It's not
> possible that skb is accidentally created that combines plaintext and
> ciphertext content.
>
> Although.. does this require adding that skb->decrypted check to
> tcp_skb_can_collapse?
Good catch. The TLS checks predate tcp_skb_can_collapse() (and MPTCP).
We've grown the check in tcp_shift_skb_data() and the logic
in tcp_grow_skb(), both missing the decrypted check.
I'll send some fixes, these are existing bugs :(
> > > And some edge cases:
> > >
> > > - retransmits
> > > - TCP fin handshake, if only one peer succeeds
> >
> > So FIN when one end is "locked down" and the other isn't?
>
> If one peer can enter the state where it drops all plaintext, while
> the other decides to close the connection before completing the
> upgrade, and thus sends a plaintext FIN.
>
> If (big if) that can happen, then the connection cannot be cleanly
> closed.
Hm. And we can avoid this by only enforcing encryption of data-less
segments once we've seen some encrypted data?
> > > - TCP control socket response to encrypted pkt
> >
> > Control sock ignores PSP.
>
> Another example where a peer stays open and stays retrying if it has
> upgraded and drops all plaintext.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-30 19:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-10 3:04 [RFC net-next 00/15] add basic PSP encryption for TCP connections Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 01/15] psp: add documentation Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 22:19 ` Saeed Mahameed
2024-05-11 0:11 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-11 9:41 ` Vadim Fedorenko
2024-05-11 16:25 ` David Ahern
2024-06-26 13:57 ` Sasha Levin
2024-05-13 1:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-29 17:35 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-30 0:47 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-30 19:51 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2024-05-30 20:15 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-30 21:03 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-31 13:56 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-06-05 0:08 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-05 20:11 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-06-05 22:24 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-06 2:40 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-06-27 15:14 ` Lance Richardson
2024-06-27 22:33 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-28 19:33 ` Lance Richardson
2024-06-28 23:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 02/15] psp: base PSP device support Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 03/15] net: modify core data structures for PSP datapath support Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 04/15] tcp: add datapath logic for PSP with inline key exchange Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 05/15] psp: add op for rotation of secret state Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-16 19:59 ` Lance Richardson
2024-05-29 17:43 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 06/15] net: psp: add socket security association code Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 07/15] net: psp: update the TCP MSS to reflect PSP packet overhead Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-13 1:47 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-29 17:48 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-30 0:52 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 08/15] psp: track generations of secret state Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 09/15] net/mlx5e: Support PSP offload functionality Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 10/15] net/mlx5e: Implement PSP operations .assoc_add and .assoc_del Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 11/15] net/mlx5e: Implement PSP Tx data path Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 12/15] net/mlx5e: Add PSP steering in local NIC RX Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-13 1:52 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 13/15] net/mlx5e: Configure PSP Rx flow steering rules Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 14/15] net/mlx5e: Add Rx data path offload Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-13 1:54 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-05-29 18:38 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-30 9:04 ` Cosmin Ratiu
2024-05-10 3:04 ` [RFC net-next 15/15] net/mlx5e: Implement PSP key_rotate operation Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-29 9:16 ` [RFC net-next 00/15] add basic PSP encryption for TCP connections Boris Pismenny
2024-05-29 18:50 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-29 20:01 ` Boris Pismenny
2024-05-29 20:38 ` Jakub Kicinski
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=20240530125120.24dd7f98@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=borisp@nvidia.com \
--cc=cratiu@nvidia.com \
--cc=gal@nvidia.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=rrameshbabu@nvidia.com \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
--cc=tariqt@nvidia.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.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).