From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Paul Chaignon <paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: Scrub packet on bpf_redirect_peer
Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 12:17:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <73cccd5e-de7d-404b-910d-c6a799c28c57@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1728ead5e0fe45e7a6542c36bd4e3ca07a73b7d6.1746460653.git.paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
On 5/5/25 12:58 PM, Paul Chaignon wrote:
> When bpf_redirect_peer is used to redirect packets to a device in
> another network namespace, the skb isn't scrubbed. That can lead skb
> information from one namespace to be "misused" in another namespace.
>
> As one example, this is causing Cilium to drop traffic when using
> bpf_redirect_peer to redirect packets that just went through IPsec
> decryption to a container namespace. The following pwru trace shows (1)
> the packet path from the host's XFRM layer to the container's XFRM
> layer where it's dropped and (2) the number of active skb extensions at
> each function.
>
> NETNS MARK IFACE TUPLE FUNC
> 4026533547 d00 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 xfrm_rcv_cb
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026533547 d00 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 xfrm4_rcv_cb
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026533547 d00 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 gro_cells_receive
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> [...]
> 4026533547 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 skb_do_redirect
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 ip_rcv
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 ip_rcv_core
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> [...]
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 udp_queue_rcv_one_skb
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 __xfrm_policy_check
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 __xfrm_decode_session
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 security_xfrm_decode_session
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
> 4026534999 0 eth0 10.244.3.124:35473->10.244.2.158:53 kfree_skb_reason(SKB_DROP_REASON_XFRM_POLICY)
> .active_extensions = (__u8)2,
>
> In this case, there are no XFRM policies in the container's network
> namespace so the drop is unexpected. When we decrypt the IPsec packet,
> the XFRM state used for decryption is set in the skb extensions. This
> information is preserved across the netns switch. When we reach the
> XFRM policy check in the container's netns, __xfrm_policy_check drops
> the packet with LINUX_MIB_XFRMINNOPOLS because a (container-side) XFRM
> policy can't be found that matches the (host-side) XFRM state used for
> decryption.
>
> This patch fixes this by scrubbing the packet when using
> bpf_redirect_peer, as is done on typical netns switches via veth
> devices except skb->mark and skb->tstamp are not zeroed.
>
> Fixes: 9aa1206e8f482 ("bpf: Add redirect_peer helper")
> Signed-off-by: Paul Chaignon <paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
next parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-06 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1728ead5e0fe45e7a6542c36bd4e3ca07a73b7d6.1746460653.git.paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
2025-05-06 19:17 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
[not found] ` <ccc86af26d43c5c0b776bcba2601b7479c0d46d0.1746460653.git.paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
2025-05-06 19:19 ` [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Clarify handling of mark and tstamp by redirect_peer Martin KaFai Lau
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=73cccd5e-de7d-404b-910d-c6a799c28c57@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.chaignon@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).