From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: [PATCH 2/2] netfilter: fix wrong arithmetics regarding NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 20:27:41 +0200 Message-ID: <1412879261-25045-3-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> References: <1412879261-25045-1-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:35846 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751408AbaJIS01 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 14:26:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1412879261-25045-1-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX should be __NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX - 1. nft_reject_icmp_code() and nft_reject_icmpv6_code() are called from the packet path, so BUG_ON in case we try to access an unknown abstracted ICMP code. This should not happen since we already validate this from nft_reject_{inet,bridge}_init(). Fixes: 51b0a5d ("netfilter: nft_reject: introduce icmp code abstraction for inet and bridge") Reported-by: Dan Carpenter Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso --- include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h | 2 +- net/netfilter/nft_reject.c | 10 ++++------ 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h index c26df67..f31fe7b 100644 --- a/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h +++ b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h @@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ enum nft_reject_inet_code { NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_ADMIN_PROHIBITED, __NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX }; -#define NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX (__NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX + 1) +#define NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX (__NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX - 1) /** * enum nft_reject_attributes - nf_tables reject expression netlink attributes diff --git a/net/netfilter/nft_reject.c b/net/netfilter/nft_reject.c index ec8a456..57d3e1a 100644 --- a/net/netfilter/nft_reject.c +++ b/net/netfilter/nft_reject.c @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ nla_put_failure: } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nft_reject_dump); -static u8 icmp_code_v4[NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX] = { +static u8 icmp_code_v4[NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX + 1] = { [NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_NO_ROUTE] = ICMP_NET_UNREACH, [NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_PORT_UNREACH] = ICMP_PORT_UNREACH, [NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_HOST_UNREACH] = ICMP_HOST_UNREACH, @@ -81,8 +81,7 @@ static u8 icmp_code_v4[NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX] = { int nft_reject_icmp_code(u8 code) { - if (code > NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX) - return -EINVAL; + BUG_ON(code > NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX); return icmp_code_v4[code]; } @@ -90,7 +89,7 @@ int nft_reject_icmp_code(u8 code) EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nft_reject_icmp_code); -static u8 icmp_code_v6[NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX] = { +static u8 icmp_code_v6[NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX + 1] = { [NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_NO_ROUTE] = ICMPV6_NOROUTE, [NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_PORT_UNREACH] = ICMPV6_PORT_UNREACH, [NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_HOST_UNREACH] = ICMPV6_ADDR_UNREACH, @@ -99,8 +98,7 @@ static u8 icmp_code_v6[NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX] = { int nft_reject_icmpv6_code(u8 code) { - if (code > NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX) - return -EINVAL; + BUG_ON(code > NFT_REJECT_ICMPX_MAX); return icmp_code_v6[code]; } -- 1.7.10.4