From: Cole Dishington <Cole.Dishington@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
To: "fw@strlen.de" <fw@strlen.de>
Cc: "coreteam@netfilter.org" <coreteam@netfilter.org>,
"netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org"
<netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"pablo@netfilter.org" <pablo@netfilter.org>,
Anthony Lineham <Anthony.Lineham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
"shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"kadlec@netfilter.org" <kadlec@netfilter.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Blair Steven <Blair.Steven@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
Scott Parlane <Scott.Parlane@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] net: netfilter: Fix port selection of FTP for NF_NAT_RANGE_PROTO_SPECIFIED
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 20:30:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <77b0addceb098af07f3bb20fbb708d190ae58b03.camel@alliedtelesis.co.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210916112641.GC20414@breakpoint.cc>
On Thu, 2021-09-16 at 13:26 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Cole Dishington <Cole.Dishington@alliedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
> > + /* Avoid applying nat->range to the reply direction */
> > + if (!exp->dir || !nat->range_info.min_proto.all || !nat-
> > >range_info.max_proto.all) {
> > + min = ntohs(exp->saved_proto.tcp.port);
> > + range_size = 65535 - min + 1;
> > + } else {
> > + min = ntohs(nat->range_info.min_proto.all);
> > + range_size = ntohs(nat->range_info.max_proto.all) - min
> > + 1;
> > + }
> > +
> > /* Try to get same port: if not, try to change it. */
> > - for (port = ntohs(exp->saved_proto.tcp.port); port != 0;
> > port++) {
> > - int ret;
> > + first_port = ntohs(exp->saved_proto.tcp.port);
> > + if (min > first_port || first_port > (min + range_size - 1))
> > + first_port = min;
> >
> > + for (i = 0, port = first_port; i < range_size; i++, port =
> > (port - first_port + i) % range_size) {
>
> This looks complicated. As far as I understand, this could instead
> be
> written like this (not even compile tested):
>
> /* Avoid applying nat->range to the reply direction */
> if (!exp->dir || !nat->range_info.min_proto.all || !nat-
> >range_info.max_proto.all) {
> min = 1;
> max = 65535;
> range_size = 65535;
> } else {
> min = ntohs(nat->range_info.min_proto.all);
> max = ntohs(nat->range_info.max_proto.all);
> range_size = max - min + 1;
> }
The original code defined the range as [ntohs(exp->saved_proto.tcp.port), 65535]. The above would
cause a change in behaviour, should we try to avoid it?
>
> /* Try to get same port: if not, try to change it. */
> port = ntohs(exp->saved_proto.tcp.port);
>
> if (port < min || port > max)
> port = min;
>
> for (i = 0; i < range_size; i++) {
> exp->tuple.dst.u.tcp.port = htons(port);
> ret = nf_ct_expect_related(exp, 0);
> if (ret != -EBUSY)
> break;
> port++;
> if (port > max)
> port = min;
> }
>
> if (ret != 0) {
> ...
>
> AFAICS this is the same, we loop at most range_size times,
> in case range_size is 64k, we will loop through all (hmmm,
> not good actually, but better make that a different change)
> else through given min - max range.
>
> If orig port was in-range, we try it first, then increment.
> If port exceeds upper bound, cycle back to min.
>
> What do you think?
Looks good, just the one question above.
Thanks for your time reviewing!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-16 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-16 4:10 [PATCH net v4] net: netfilter: Fix port selection of FTP for NF_NAT_RANGE_PROTO_SPECIFIED Cole Dishington
2021-09-16 11:26 ` Florian Westphal
2021-09-16 20:30 ` Cole Dishington [this message]
2021-09-17 14:04 ` 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=77b0addceb098af07f3bb20fbb708d190ae58b03.camel@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--to=cole.dishington@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=Anthony.Lineham@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=Blair.Steven@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=Scott.Parlane@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=kadlec@netfilter.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).