Commit 976eba8a authored by Xin Long's avatar Xin Long Committed by Steffen Klassert

ip_vti: receive ipip packet by calling ip_tunnel_rcv

In Commit dd9ee344 ("vti4: Fix a ipip packet processing bug in
'IPCOMP' virtual tunnel"), it tries to receive IPIP packets in vti
by calling xfrm_input(). This case happens when a small packet or
frag sent by peer is too small to get compressed.

However, xfrm_input() will still get to the IPCOMP path where skb
sec_path is set, but never dropped while it should have been done
in vti_ipcomp4_protocol.cb_handler(vti_rcv_cb), as it's not an
ipcomp4 packet. This will cause that the packet can never pass
xfrm4_policy_check() in the upper protocol rcv functions.

So this patch is to call ip_tunnel_rcv() to process IPIP packets
instead.

Fixes: dd9ee344 ("vti4: Fix a ipip packet processing bug in 'IPCOMP' virtual tunnel")
Reported-by: default avatarXiumei Mu <xmu@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarXin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarSteffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
parent a204aef9
...@@ -93,7 +93,28 @@ static int vti_rcv_proto(struct sk_buff *skb) ...@@ -93,7 +93,28 @@ static int vti_rcv_proto(struct sk_buff *skb)
static int vti_rcv_tunnel(struct sk_buff *skb) static int vti_rcv_tunnel(struct sk_buff *skb)
{ {
return vti_rcv(skb, ip_hdr(skb)->saddr, true); struct ip_tunnel_net *itn = net_generic(dev_net(skb->dev), vti_net_id);
const struct iphdr *iph = ip_hdr(skb);
struct ip_tunnel *tunnel;
tunnel = ip_tunnel_lookup(itn, skb->dev->ifindex, TUNNEL_NO_KEY,
iph->saddr, iph->daddr, 0);
if (tunnel) {
struct tnl_ptk_info tpi = {
.proto = htons(ETH_P_IP),
};
if (!xfrm4_policy_check(NULL, XFRM_POLICY_IN, skb))
goto drop;
if (iptunnel_pull_header(skb, 0, tpi.proto, false))
goto drop;
return ip_tunnel_rcv(tunnel, skb, &tpi, NULL, false);
}
return -EINVAL;
drop:
kfree_skb(skb);
return 0;
} }
static int vti_rcv_cb(struct sk_buff *skb, int err) static int vti_rcv_cb(struct sk_buff *skb, int err)
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment