From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
To: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: sctp: inherit auth_capable on INIT collisions
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 00:13:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C99BEF.1010203@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53C998DE.2030805@gmail.com>
On 07/18/2014 11:59 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> On 07/18/2014 03:17 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 07/18/2014 04:38 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> ...
>>> Why is the original value of asoc->peer.auth_capable = 0?
>>> In case of collision, asoc is the old association that
>>> existed on the system. That association was created as part of
>>> sending the INIT. If it is processing a duplicate COOKIE-ECHO
>>> as you say, then it has already processed the INIT-ACK and
>>> should have determined that the peer is auth capable.
>>>
>>> Thus the capability of the new and the old associations should
>>> be same if we are in fact processing case B (collision).
>>>
>>> If not, then something else if wrong and my guess is that all
>>> other capabilities would be wrong too.
>>
>> I agree that they might likely also be flawed.
>>
>> Ok, let me dig further.
>
> So I think I know why case D ends up not authenticating the COOKIE-ACK.
> Most likely the reason is the following statement:
> repl = sctp_make_cookie_ack(new_asoc, chunk);
>
> Note that we use new_asoc, instead of current asoc.
Thanks, I will give it a try.
Btw, noticed also that when we have AUTH + COOKIE_ECHO collisions,
we don't seem to handle them properly either. The normal case works
fine, but in case of a collision both sides seem to use wrong RANDOM
etc params, and thus discard the handshake due to bad signature.
> Not sure why case B is dumping core yet.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-18 22:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-17 18:05 [PATCH net] net: sctp: inherit auth_capable on INIT collisions Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-18 12:35 ` Neil Horman
2014-07-18 14:38 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-18 19:17 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-18 21:59 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-18 22:13 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2014-07-18 23:03 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-19 2:23 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-20 9:13 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-18 23:23 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-22 13:25 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-22 16:41 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-22 16:43 ` Daniel Borkmann
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=53C99BEF.1010203@redhat.com \
--to=dborkman@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vyasevich@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).