Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Moshe Kol <moshe.kol@mail.huji.ac.il>,
        Yossi Gilad <yossi.gilad@mail.huji.ac.il>,
        Amit Klein <aksecurity@gmail.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 263/264] tcp: increase source port perturb table to 2^16
Date:   Thu, 23 Jun 2022 18:44:16 +0200
Message-Id: <20220623164351.504831193@linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220623164344.053938039@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20220623164344.053938039@linuxfoundation.org>
User-Agent: quilt/0.66
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>

commit 4c2c8f03a5ab7cb04ec64724d7d176d00bcc91e5 upstream.

Moshe Kol, Amit Klein, and Yossi Gilad reported being able to accurately
identify a client by forcing it to emit only 40 times more connections
than there are entries in the table_perturb[] table. The previous two
improvements consisting in resalting the secret every 10s and adding
randomness to each port selection only slightly improved the situation,
and the current value of 2^8 was too small as it's not very difficult
to make a client emit 10k connections in less than 10 seconds.

Thus we're increasing the perturb table from 2^8 to 2^16 so that the
same precision now requires 2.6M connections, which is more difficult in
this time frame and harder to hide as a background activity. The impact
is that the table now uses 256 kB instead of 1 kB, which could mostly
affect devices making frequent outgoing connections. However such
components usually target a small set of destinations (load balancers,
database clients, perf assessment tools), and in practice only a few
entries will be visited, like before.

A live test at 1 million connections per second showed no performance
difference from the previous value.

Reported-by: Moshe Kol <moshe.kol@mail.huji.ac.il>
Reported-by: Yossi Gilad <yossi.gilad@mail.huji.ac.il>
Reported-by: Amit Klein <aksecurity@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c |    9 +++++----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
@@ -541,11 +541,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inet_unhash);
  * Note that we use 32bit integers (vs RFC 'short integers')
  * because 2^16 is not a multiple of num_ephemeral and this
  * property might be used by clever attacker.
- * RFC claims using TABLE_LENGTH=10 buckets gives an improvement,
- * we use 256 instead to really give more isolation and
- * privacy, this only consumes 1 KB of kernel memory.
+ * RFC claims using TABLE_LENGTH=10 buckets gives an improvement, though
+ * attacks were since demonstrated, thus we use 65536 instead to really
+ * give more isolation and privacy, at the expense of 256kB of kernel
+ * memory.
  */
-#define INET_TABLE_PERTURB_SHIFT 8
+#define INET_TABLE_PERTURB_SHIFT 16
 #define INET_TABLE_PERTURB_SIZE (1 << INET_TABLE_PERTURB_SHIFT)
 static u32 *table_perturb;