diff options
| author | Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com> | 2019-02-05 20:30:27 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> | 2019-03-23 08:44:18 +0100 |
| commit | 82774efd6d34167fdb260cd74ee37fcbf323dda0 (patch) | |
| tree | ef8cbef2e362b680594d82d96000c2dc3e8581cd /net/ceph | |
| parent | 0effb9fb3dfeac514d8ce8a2ba3da970793711ba (diff) | |
libceph: handle an empty authorize reply
commit 0fd3fd0a9bb0b02b6435bb7070e9f7b82a23f068 upstream.
The authorize reply can be empty, for example when the ticket used to
build the authorizer is too old and TAG_BADAUTHORIZER is returned from
the service. Calling ->verify_authorizer_reply() results in an attempt
to decrypt and validate (somewhat) random data in au->buf (most likely
the signature block from calc_signature()), which fails and ends up in
con_fault_finish() with !con->auth_retry. The ticket isn't invalidated
and the connection is retried again and again until a new ticket is
obtained from the monitor:
libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
libceph: osd2 192.168.122.1:6809 bad authorize reply
Let TAG_BADAUTHORIZER handler kick in and increment con->auth_retry.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 5c056fdc5b47 ("libceph: verify authorize reply on connect")
Link: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20164
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Sage Weil <sage@redhat.com>
[idryomov@gmail.com: backport to 4.4: extra arg, no CEPHX_V2]
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'net/ceph')
| -rw-r--r-- | net/ceph/messenger.c | 12 |
1 files changed, 8 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c index 3e6897efe1eb..3ed2796d008b 100644 --- a/net/ceph/messenger.c +++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c @@ -2049,15 +2049,19 @@ static int process_connect(struct ceph_connection *con) dout("process_connect on %p tag %d\n", con, (int)con->in_tag); if (con->auth_reply_buf) { + int len = le32_to_cpu(con->in_reply.authorizer_len); + /* * Any connection that defines ->get_authorizer() * should also define ->verify_authorizer_reply(). * See get_connect_authorizer(). */ - ret = con->ops->verify_authorizer_reply(con, 0); - if (ret < 0) { - con->error_msg = "bad authorize reply"; - return ret; + if (len) { + ret = con->ops->verify_authorizer_reply(con, 0); + if (ret < 0) { + con->error_msg = "bad authorize reply"; + return ret; + } } } |