Commit 3916a319 authored by Christoph Schulz's avatar Christoph Schulz Committed by David S. Miller

net: ppp: don't call sk_chk_filter twice

Commit 568f194e ("net: ppp: use
sk_unattached_filter api") causes sk_chk_filter() to be called twice when
setting a PPP pass or active filter. This applies to both the generic PPP
subsystem implemented by drivers/net/ppp/ppp_generic.c and the ISDN PPP
subsystem implemented by drivers/isdn/i4l/isdn_ppp.c. The first call is from
within get_filter(). The second one is through the call chain

  ppp_ioctl() or isdn_ppp_ioctl()
  --> sk_unattached_filter_create()
      --> __sk_prepare_filter()
          --> sk_chk_filter()

The first call from within get_filter() should be deleted as get_filter() is
called just before calling sk_unattached_filter_create() later on, which
eventually calls sk_chk_filter() anyway.

For 3.15.x, this proposed change is a bugfix rather than a pure optimization as
in that branch, sk_chk_filter() may replace filter codes by other codes which
are not recognized when executing sk_chk_filter() a second time. So with
3.15.x, if sk_chk_filter() is called twice, the second invocation may yield
EINVAL (this depends on the filter codes found in the filter to be set, but
because the replacement is done for frequently used codes, this is almost
always the case). The net effect is that setting pass and/or active PPP filters
does not work anymore, since sk_unattached_filter_create() always returns
EINVAL due to the second call to sk_chk_filter(), regardless whether the filter
was originally sane or not.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristoph Schulz <develop@kristov.de>
Acked-by: default avatarDaniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent 32b333fe
...@@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p) ...@@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p)
{ {
struct sock_fprog uprog; struct sock_fprog uprog;
struct sock_filter *code = NULL; struct sock_filter *code = NULL;
int len, err; int len;
if (copy_from_user(&uprog, arg, sizeof(uprog))) if (copy_from_user(&uprog, arg, sizeof(uprog)))
return -EFAULT; return -EFAULT;
...@@ -458,12 +458,6 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p) ...@@ -458,12 +458,6 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p)
if (IS_ERR(code)) if (IS_ERR(code))
return PTR_ERR(code); return PTR_ERR(code);
err = sk_chk_filter(code, uprog.len);
if (err) {
kfree(code);
return err;
}
*p = code; *p = code;
return uprog.len; return uprog.len;
} }
......
...@@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p) ...@@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p)
{ {
struct sock_fprog uprog; struct sock_fprog uprog;
struct sock_filter *code = NULL; struct sock_filter *code = NULL;
int len, err; int len;
if (copy_from_user(&uprog, arg, sizeof(uprog))) if (copy_from_user(&uprog, arg, sizeof(uprog)))
return -EFAULT; return -EFAULT;
...@@ -554,12 +554,6 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p) ...@@ -554,12 +554,6 @@ static int get_filter(void __user *arg, struct sock_filter **p)
if (IS_ERR(code)) if (IS_ERR(code))
return PTR_ERR(code); return PTR_ERR(code);
err = sk_chk_filter(code, uprog.len);
if (err) {
kfree(code);
return err;
}
*p = code; *p = code;
return uprog.len; return uprog.len;
} }
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment