On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 09:49:43PM +0200, Fernando Fernandez Mancera wrote:
> Hi Pablo, comments below.
>
> On 6/17/19 5:45 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 12:32:35PM +0200, Fernando Fernandez Mancera wrote:
> >> Add SYNPROXY module support in nf_tables. It preserves the behaviour of the
> >> SYNPROXY target of iptables but structured in a different way to propose
> >> improvements in the future.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Fernando Fernandez Mancera <[email protected]>
> >> ---
> >> include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_SYNPROXY.h | 4 +
> >> include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h | 16 +
> >> net/netfilter/Kconfig | 11 +
> >> net/netfilter/Makefile | 1 +
> >> net/netfilter/nft_synproxy.c | 328 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 5 files changed, 360 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 net/netfilter/nft_synproxy.c
> >>
> [...]
> >> +
> >> +static void nft_synproxy_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr,
> >> + struct nft_regs *regs,
> >> + const struct nft_pktinfo *pkt)
> >> +{
> >
> > You have to check if this is TCP traffic in first place, otherwise UDP
> > packets may enter this path :-).
> >
> >> + switch (nft_pf(pkt)) {
> >> + case NFPROTO_IPV4:
> >> + nft_synproxy_eval_v4(expr, regs, pkt);
> >> + return;
> >> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_TABLES_IPV6)
> >> + case NFPROTO_IPV6:
> >> + nft_synproxy_eval_v6(expr, regs, pkt);
> >> + return;
> >> +#endif
> >
> > Please, use skb->protocol instead of nft_pf(), I would like we can use
> > nft_synproxy from NFPROTO_NETDEV (ingress) and NFPROTO_BRIDGE families
> > too.
> >
>
> If I use skb->protocol no packet enters in the path. What do you
> recommend me? Other than that, the rest of the suggestions are done and
> it has been tested and it worked as expected. Thanks :-)
skb->protocol uses big endian representation, you have to check for:
switch (skb->protocol) {
case htons(ETH_P_IP):
...
break;
case htons(ETH_P_IPV6):
...
break;
}
