All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: dborkman@redhat.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
	tgraf@suug.ch, hannes@stressinduktion.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] netlink: use jhash as hashfn for rhashtable
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 14:38:29 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141209.143829.477482216978677919.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1418056230-8700-1-git-send-email-dborkman@redhat.com>

From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Date: Mon,  8 Dec 2014 17:30:30 +0100

> For netlink, we shouldn't be using arch_fast_hash() as a hashing
> discipline, but rather jhash() instead.
> 
> Since netlink sockets can be opened by any user, a local attacker
> would be able to easily create collisions with the DPDK-derived
> arch_fast_hash(), which trades off performance for security by
> using crc32 CPU instructions on x86_64.
> 
> While it might have a legimite use case in other places, it should
> be avoided in netlink context, though. As rhashtable's API is very
> flexible, we could later on still decide on other hashing disciplines,
> if legitimate.
> 
> Reference: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1844123
> Fixes: e341694e3eb5 ("netlink: Convert netlink_lookup() to use RCU protected hash table")
> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
> Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>

I think I've seen enough of this.

First of all, you've left all of the example initializers in the
rhashtable implementation recommending to use arch_fast_hash.

Secondly, after this, openvswitch (and nfsd, ugh) are the only users
remaining.   Even though there have been claims that using this
doesn't expose to openvswitch to being hash attackable, I'm still
not entirely convinced that an attacker cannot hurt performance
of an OVS node as a result of this.

I think this whole scheme should be reverted, whatever cycles
openvswitch gains by using crc32c instructions is far outweighed
by the confusion this has caused and all of this infrastructure
created for just one or two users.

Someone send me a patch to revert all of the arch_fast_hash
stuff, and every reference thereof, or else I'll do it myself.

Thanks.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-12-09 19:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-08 16:30 [PATCH net] netlink: use jhash as hashfn for rhashtable Daniel Borkmann
2014-12-08 16:38 ` Thomas Graf
2014-12-08 16:56 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-12-08 17:20   ` Dave Taht
2014-12-08 17:25     ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-12-09 19:38 ` David Miller [this message]
2014-12-09 22:56   ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-12-09 23:09     ` David Miller

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=20141209.143829.477482216978677919.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
    --cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.