From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jiri@resnulli.us, victor@mojatatu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net/sched: reset conntrack after packet munging
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 14:09:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aobuk1osK-Lq-aMk@strlen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM0EoMnvz6A_v65s=jcdw5nxL6N2+yd7ZBvp78mtt7edkPe-sw@mail.gmail.com>
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> wrote:
> Example: If the ebpf one could be reproduced with unshare -urn would
> it have been fine to make the fix sit in netfilter?
I don't know how to 'fix netfilter'. We would have to remove skb->nfct
and re-parse at every turn. Is that a viable option...? Don't think so.
> > And that doesn't solve BPF (can sit anywhere) or OVS (no idea here if
> > its affected or not).
>
> OVS is very likely affected.
> I saw your other email and you are the expert, but I am itchy to try
> the nf_confirm() approach.
> At minimal it should fix the PoC imo.
As I said, I don't see any existing function that could be used
to add the required re-validation. nf_confirm() is the last step
in the pipeline, its way too late. nf_conntrack_in() doesn't work
either because you can install matches earlier than that, e.g. via
-t raw -m conntrack in classic iptables, or via 'hook prerouting
type filter priority -2147483647' or something like that in
nftables.
The only other option is playing whack-a-mole, accepting the original
proposed patch for nft_ct, but I can already tell this will not be
enough and revalidation will have to be added everywhere.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-20 12:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-19 20:42 [PATCH net 0/4] net/sched: reset conntrack after packet munging Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 1/4] selftests/tc-testing: pass mp_pm via initialiser Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 2/4] net/sched: act_pedit: drop conntrack on network/transport header changes Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 3/4] selftests: tc-testing: add act_ct test for ct reset handling Florian Westphal
2026-08-19 20:42 ` [PATCH net 4/4] net/sched: act_nat: discard any conntrack entry post modification Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 11:09 ` [PATCH net 0/4] net/sched: reset conntrack after packet munging Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 11:32 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 11:44 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 11:42 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 11:58 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 12:09 ` Florian Westphal [this message]
2026-08-20 12:41 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 13:10 ` Florian Westphal
2026-08-20 16:54 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2026-08-20 17:37 ` Florian Westphal
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=aobuk1osK-Lq-aMk@strlen.de \
--to=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=victor@mojatatu.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