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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7231FC0044C for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 13:06:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3065E20819 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 13:06:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=labo.rs header.i=@labo.rs header.b="l73QHTek"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="w/Dhv90x" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3065E20819 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=labo.rs Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729905AbeKEW03 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 17:26:29 -0500 Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]:49439 "EHLO wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728870AbeKEW02 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 17:26:28 -0500 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C5EF1687; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 08:06:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 05 Nov 2018 08:06:47 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labo.rs; h= subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=U 9nzanSJIND/JqNgyWFIVTnyXOclV1oxoHVOwJ3pC4U=; b=l73QHTek7436sVWQH g6y6em4yfU/57xoOujj4/Iaf0RVAt9zPq5NK8VAMff9XO2jCg8rciZVIKuKIuAjm 5I/hPcP2vvsnJ/ZzwjiVqorwDzFerOYlU4vSVxT9Ft8shMbP27r0CA8jYe7rAiHQ SnIJib7CUCZFU5GpwuC4bN+YNfERteTbjkqaz4d3bFwbM8K1bfhIycCaqs8RIo3j TpKMlZo3noIk2Xx5sXjJq+RKVSWm0pEXKf1VYpmoe8wjPd4fsx2Y38QsGDSTNuNP UnCokCOYemdndUtQCnbATyZew8OxtzRHYbQbs0FmiBi3MhYmIsYVPhskRRbmgaIF RVHZw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=U9nzanSJIND/JqNgyWFIVTnyXOclV1oxoHVOwJ3pC 4U=; b=w/Dhv90xxuJk0FtipXh8B5lwBfoEaDg2qDhQfUM7xD4HoxlNUvyBcd98e R/1oSDYGyM8RCefo8JvFtu0i9KbI9MFQn7AvJaAJiyrbHNYpYjBzuLO2Kyup2jMH XDxMYiKDqaEXiGue0hFqB/C01zbCvFz6CtRJtUe74Uua2UCmQ1+5V+a/zTLo7mpI KS91CY3Wv7oNwWJ2diiUnULd+rSai/QIzqDj35+sN9cTpupzmq1Ang4HvgItUreE TtaONjZSGWGHViCSW5zxROsDlu6jy9l6gEL/io9Jrd10gCyC4fuvLv0wiwg87lxe twGGdAALbT8wHEutpqSd8FHftqFPA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [0.0.0.0] (lada.labath.rs [185.194.239.81]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2A649E490F; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 08:06:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 23/23] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Dave Taht Cc: LKML , Netdev , Linux Crypto Mailing List , David Miller , Greg Kroah-Hartman References: <20180925145622.29959-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <20180925145622.29959-24-Jason@zx2c4.com> <7830522a-968e-0880-beb7-44904466cf14@labo.rs> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Ivan_Lab=c3=a1th?= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:06:42 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 26. 9. 2018 18:04, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 6:00 PM Ivan Labáth wrote: >> >> On 25.09.2018 16:56, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >>> Extensive documentation and description of the protocol and >>> considerations, along with formal proofs of the cryptography, are> available at: >>> >>> * https://www.wireguard.com/ >>> * https://www.wireguard.com/papers/wireguard.pdf >> [] >>> +enum { HANDSHAKE_DSCP = 0x88 /* AF41, plus 00 ECN */ }; >> [] >>> + if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP)) { >>> + len = ntohs(ip_hdr(skb)->tot_len); >>> + if (unlikely(len < sizeof(struct iphdr))) >>> + goto dishonest_packet_size; >>> + if (INET_ECN_is_ce(PACKET_CB(skb)->ds)) >>> + IP_ECN_set_ce(ip_hdr(skb)); >>> + } else if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6)) { >>> + len = ntohs(ipv6_hdr(skb)->payload_len) + >>> + sizeof(struct ipv6hdr); >>> + if (INET_ECN_is_ce(PACKET_CB(skb)->ds)) >>> + IP6_ECN_set_ce(skb, ipv6_hdr(skb)); >>> + } else >> [] >>> + skb_queue_walk (&packets, skb) { >>> + /* 0 for no outer TOS: no leak. TODO: should we use flowi->tos >>> + * as outer? */ >>> + PACKET_CB(skb)->ds = ip_tunnel_ecn_encap(0, ip_hdr(skb), skb); >>> + PACKET_CB(skb)->nonce = >>> + atomic64_inc_return(&key->counter.counter) - 1; >>> + if (unlikely(PACKET_CB(skb)->nonce >= REJECT_AFTER_MESSAGES)) >>> + goto out_invalid; >>> + } >> Hi, >> >> is there documentation and/or rationale for ecn handling? >> Quick search for ecn and dscp didn't reveal any. > > ECN support was developed with Dave Taht so that it does the right > thing with CAKE and such. He's CC'd, so that he can fill in details, > and sure, we can write these up. As well, I can add the rationale for > the handshake-packet-specific DSCP value to the paper in the next few > days; thanks for pointing out these documentation oversights. > > Jason > Any news on this? To be clear, question is not about an insignificant documentation oversight. It is about copying bits from inner packets to outer packets of a secure* tunnel and documenting it AFAICT nowhere, while claiming extensive documentation. * it really should be specified what secure tunnel means, as it has many plausible interpretations and wireguard surely does not fulfill all of them. Ivan