[libvirt-users] netfilter+libvirt=(smth got broken?)

[Laine Stump]

On 03/26/2013 10:18 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 02:10:33PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
>> On 03/22/2013 06:53 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:55:42AM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>>> Hi Eric,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:18:21PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>>> By looking at the changes you made:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --A FI-vnet0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 110 -m conntrack --ctstate
>>>>>>> ESTABLISHED -m conntrack --ctdir ORIGINAL -j RETURN
>>>>>>> +-A FI-vnet0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 110 -m conntrack --ctstate
>>>>>>> ESTABLISHED -m conntrack --ctdir REPLY -j RETURN
>>>>>> The first rule looks wrong to me indeed, traffic coming in the
>>>>>> original direction will initiate the connection to destination port
>>>>>> TCP/110. Therefore, your change is correct.
>>>>> Correct for the new kernel interpretation, but we also want to support
>>>>> use of libvirt with older kernels, preferably with a runtime check so
>>>>> that a binary compiled on an older kernel will still work after a kernel
>>>>> upgrade.
>>>> My suggestion is to relax that rule-set that you're using, ie. remove
>>>> the --ctdir. The connection tracking table and the TCP tracker already
>>>> take care for those invalid situations that you were trying to catch
>>>> with that --ctdir. You only have to add an iptables rule somewhere to
>>>> catch invalid packets.
>>> In case you need more information, have a look at:
>>>
>>> linux/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_tcp.c
>>>
>>> Basically, the TCP tracker already validates that traffic is coming
>>> from the correct direction. We have an internal state-machine for
>>> that that will put coming in the wrong direction packets into the
>>> INVALID state. If you have a rule-set whose default policy is drop or
>>> you log and drop invalid packets, it will allow you to obtain the
>>> effect you seem to be looking for. So basically, it's safe to remove
>>> the --ctdir without having a less secure rule-set.
>> So in effect, you're admitting that --ctdir is now more or less
>> unusable, since it's meaning/function can't be relied on, so everyone
>> should just avoid it. In retrospect then, it probably would have been a
>> much better decision to leave it "broken" (but at least in a
>> known/consistent/usable fashion). (Nothing to be done about that now,
>> though, since it's in the wild in both versions).
> This option has also been broken for quite some time in user-space:
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/netfilter-devel/msg15827.html
>
> The fix was available starting iptables 1.4.11. The kernel fix went
> into 2.6.39.
>
> I'm trying to help you to find a good solution that works in all
> cases, including old kernels, and to explain why that option, using it
> in the broken way or not, provides no safer ruleset in the TCP case.

Understood and appreciated. I'm just pointing out the futility of
"fixing" something that's already in a published API.

Now I just need to convince Stefan that rulesets without --ctdir are
just as secure (where the limit of my "convince" is "point at your
message on the list" :-)