netfilter: x_tables: fix unconditional helper

commit 54d83fc74aa9ec72794373cb47432c5f7fb1a309 upstream.

Ben Hawkes says:

 In the mark_source_chains function (net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c) it
 is possible for a user-supplied ipt_entry structure to have a large
 next_offset field. This field is not bounds checked prior to writing a
 counter value at the supplied offset.

Problem is that mark_source_chains should not have been called --
the rule doesn't have a next entry, so its supposed to return
an absolute verdict of either ACCEPT or DROP.

However, the function conditional() doesn't work as the name implies.
It only checks that the rule is using wildcard address matching.

However, an unconditional rule must also not be using any matches
(no -m args).

The underflow validator only checked the addresses, therefore
passing the 'unconditional absolute verdict' test, while
mark_source_chains also tested for presence of matches, and thus
proceeeded to the next (not-existent) rule.

Unify this so that all the callers have same idea of 'unconditional rule'.

Reported-by: Ben Hawkes <hawkes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

1 files changed, 11 insertions, 12 deletions

diff --git a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c
index 69a4ebec2012..6198807e06f4 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c
@@ -198,11 +198,12 @@ get_entry(const void *base, unsigned int offset)
 
 /* All zeroes == unconditional rule. */
 /* Mildly perf critical (only if packet tracing is on) */
-static inline bool unconditional(const struct ip6t_ip6 *ipv6)
+static inline bool unconditional(const struct ip6t_entry *e)
 {
 	static const struct ip6t_ip6 uncond;
 
-	return memcmp(ipv6, &uncond, sizeof(uncond)) == 0;
+	return e->target_offset == sizeof(struct ip6t_entry) &&
+	       memcmp(&e->ipv6, &uncond, sizeof(uncond)) == 0;
 }
 
 static inline const struct xt_entry_target *
@@ -258,11 +259,10 @@ get_chainname_rulenum(const struct ip6t_entry *s, const struct ip6t_entry *e,
 	} else if (s == e) {
 		(*rulenum)++;
 
-		if (s->target_offset == sizeof(struct ip6t_entry) &&
+		if (unconditional(s) &&
 		    strcmp(t->target.u.kernel.target->name,
 			   XT_STANDARD_TARGET) == 0 &&
-		    t->verdict < 0 &&
-		    unconditional(&s->ipv6)) {
+		    t->verdict < 0) {
 			/* Tail of chains: STANDARD target (return/policy) */
 			*comment = *chainname == hookname
 				? comments[NF_IP6_TRACE_COMMENT_POLICY]
@@ -488,11 +488,10 @@ mark_source_chains(const struct xt_table_info *newinfo,
 			e->comefrom |= ((1 << hook) | (1 << NF_INET_NUMHOOKS));
 
 			/* Unconditional return/END. */
-			if ((e->target_offset == sizeof(struct ip6t_entry) &&
+			if ((unconditional(e) &&
 			     (strcmp(t->target.u.user.name,
 				     XT_STANDARD_TARGET) == 0) &&
-			     t->verdict < 0 &&
-			     unconditional(&e->ipv6)) || visited) {
+			     t->verdict < 0) || visited) {
 				unsigned int oldpos, size;
 
 				if ((strcmp(t->target.u.user.name,
@@ -727,7 +726,7 @@ static bool check_underflow(const struct ip6t_entry *e)
 	const struct xt_entry_target *t;
 	unsigned int verdict;
 
-	if (!unconditional(&e->ipv6))
+	if (!unconditional(e))
 		return false;
 	t = ip6t_get_target_c(e);
 	if (strcmp(t->u.user.name, XT_STANDARD_TARGET) != 0)
@@ -775,9 +774,9 @@ check_entry_size_and_hooks(struct ip6t_entry *e,
 			newinfo->hook_entry[h] = hook_entries[h];
 		if ((unsigned char *)e - base == underflows[h]) {
 			if (!check_underflow(e)) {
-				pr_err("Underflows must be unconditional and "
-				       "use the STANDARD target with "
-				       "ACCEPT/DROP\n");
+				pr_debug("Underflows must be unconditional and "
+					 "use the STANDARD target with "
+					 "ACCEPT/DROP\n");
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
 			newinfo->underflow[h] = underflows[h];