From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2531CC433FE for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 21:40:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233510AbiKGVkR (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2022 16:40:17 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33354 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233511AbiKGVkQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2022 16:40:16 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x636.google.com (mail-ej1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::636]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7FD527DE1 for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 13:40:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x636.google.com with SMTP id k2so33758178ejr.2 for ; Mon, 07 Nov 2022 13:40:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=a7Pu312VBrRa3fZpA2kIIB54gqaUtTzt/kFTpVj9Gyg=; b=n5wjSnKDahfy6jokw7XFLSSk66A4Ob296f44tyNXmPenGjHHPloCpXMD1Ez/AkqESK SLHykNycUc06VqR7N9BrpxYUZtNhvxyYPu5z0aNrhswA+iK7SMIJestecpQ/XTqyH6g0 zejJLg0rvbsQoFhSb8h5lbkKbsowOJbX/A0gPHQfRCEGjn8cowuBP3NdX6YGRFOQuF33 iS6lEvYdkVYPYHVB1ezKwL9pCCSoypVt6jZN0WlFa1XrjlSeg3nSBWW0Z/HD2nj9mBPQ 6IlnUzFioaelYmGCEpvGVCJxJ/Q+T+dHKlmZbGNk/qO/sSylhdfKk8n3naHnRxXN/0yo d76A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=a7Pu312VBrRa3fZpA2kIIB54gqaUtTzt/kFTpVj9Gyg=; b=OZHfaIuirG4V54Z+8oujXJWrW3Hrqr7mRw4KglP2KDGUmJx2iWi6dSiA4AqWIKC6k4 T68Q6WVYPNIL7LBIvF2OV95NX7XgTZD3WZFqFEDPm3w7wBn6IIx0hp22/zBbDe5LIlXx FxUPwg8RmueHcNrFOTWdGsTtY7O9yjQ3HKB5QUEZIY9QIKaQQ0xiWgt2uRPT7s0wUbsc lplihGkQz9gKrdn+lLz6whkybAnzPzn+aXhOnfvSZqtzBbmlDsD8F3311P+XqTpWUL4O ojZ/ZyRtz0rynjhHRBPo2CMLb37/iLB0FaDuwZJqbSsKpbV7Cg+/o6YoGHdA7F93B2D6 /1yQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3pbiTd3QByzG/gzWonv0p8wsGO+SsleMVsloJyKledp1lnuDhI prCZkLQ/GKj97A3TR3xptpT2jUAzS3jYWLnZAHU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM675OVDVgKSw3ua7nw/asBTMb/aRORa1xk0sqS6j8Ja93NCFLWkXxRtCKVOaR7mYmsIB9DwvFVv+7bFcPtOBTE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1de6:b0:7a5:ea4b:ddbb with SMTP id og38-20020a1709071de600b007a5ea4bddbbmr50075967ejc.757.1667857213303; Mon, 07 Nov 2022 13:40:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221011231207.1458541-1-lsahlber@redhat.com> <0fb9b48e-3bcc-5a5e-15fb-1d3e2752d80b@leemhuis.info> <7a348025-8db3-449b-e92d-7033104d60d3@leemhuis.info> In-Reply-To: <7a348025-8db3-449b-e92d-7033104d60d3@leemhuis.info> From: ronnie sahlberg Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 07:40:00 +1000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: fix regression in very old smb1 mounts To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Ronnie Sahlberg , Steve French , "regressions@lists.linux.dev" , linux-cifs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 at 23:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > On 07.11.22 14:31, ronnie sahlberg wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 at 23:20, Thorsten Leemhuis > > wrote: > >> > >> On 01.11.22 18:53, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>> On 12.10.22 01:12, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote: > >>>> BZ: 215375 > >>>> > >>>> Fixes: 76a3c92ec9e0668e4cd0e9ff1782eb68f61a179c ("cifs: remove support for NTLM and weaker authentication algorithms") > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg > >>> > >>> Ronnie, Steve, did this change create any trouble in 6.1 pre-releases so > >>> far? If not: could you please consider submitting this change for > >>> inclusion in 6.0 and 5.15, as this is a regression from the 5.15 days > >>> that according to the bugzilla ticket seem to annoy some people a lot. > >> > >> Ronnie, Steve, if you have a minute, I would really appreciate your help > >> in this matter, you are the best people to judge here. > > > > Thanks for the reminder. I don't think there were any issues in the > > pre-release so we should try to get it into the stable kernels. > > Great. > > > I am not sure how that process works since the patch is already in upstream. > > (I have only seen the process where you flag the patch with cc-stable.) > > Can you explain the process on how to flag this existing patch for backporting? > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst (or > https://docs.kernel.org/process/stable-kernel-rules.html ) explains this > (see option 3 there) better than I can. The patch afaics needs to got to > 6.0 and 5.15. Thanks. What we need here is option 2. Steve, can you send an email for option 2 so we get it in the older kernels? > > Many thx for taking care of this! > > Ciao, Thorsten > > > >>>> --- > >>>> fs/cifs/connect.c | 11 +++++------ > >>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c > >>>> index 93e59b3b36c7..c77232096c12 100644 > >>>> --- a/fs/cifs/connect.c > >>>> +++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c > >>>> @@ -3922,12 +3922,11 @@ CIFSTCon(const unsigned int xid, struct cifs_ses *ses, > >>>> pSMB->AndXCommand = 0xFF; > >>>> pSMB->Flags = cpu_to_le16(TCON_EXTENDED_SECINFO); > >>>> bcc_ptr = &pSMB->Password[0]; > >>>> - if (tcon->pipe || (ses->server->sec_mode & SECMODE_USER)) { > >>>> - pSMB->PasswordLength = cpu_to_le16(1); /* minimum */ > >>>> - *bcc_ptr = 0; /* password is null byte */ > >>>> - bcc_ptr++; /* skip password */ > >>>> - /* already aligned so no need to do it below */ > >>>> - } > >>>> + > >>>> + pSMB->PasswordLength = cpu_to_le16(1); /* minimum */ > >>>> + *bcc_ptr = 0; /* password is null byte */ > >>>> + bcc_ptr++; /* skip password */ > >>>> + /* already aligned so no need to do it below */ > >>>> > >>>> if (ses->server->sign) > >>>> smb_buffer->Flags2 |= SMBFLG2_SECURITY_SIGNATURE; > >