Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com> wrote:
> The dual stack API automatically forces the traffic to be IPv4
> if v4mapped addresses are used at bind() or connect(), so it makes
> no sense to allow IPv6 traffic to use the same v4mapped class.
>
> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com>
> Cc: Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de>
> Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <han...@stressinduktion.org>
> Reported-by: syzbot <syzkal...@googlegroups.com>
> ---
> net/ipv6/ip6_input.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c
> index
> d432d0011c160f41aec09640e95179dd7b364cfc..2bb0b66181a741c7fb73cacbdf34c5160f52d186
> 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c
> @@ -223,6 +223,16 @@ static struct sk_buff *ip6_rcv_core(struct sk_buff *skb,
> struct net_device *dev,
> if (ipv6_addr_is_multicast(&hdr->saddr))
> goto err;
>
> + /* While RFC4291 is not explicit about v4mapped addresses
> + * in IPv6 headers, it seems clear linux dual-stack
> + * model can not deal properly with these.
> + * Security models could be fooled by ::ffff:127.0.0.1 for example.
> + *
> + * https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-itojun-v6ops-v4mapped-harmful-02
> + */
> + if (ipv6_addr_v4mapped(&hdr->saddr))
> + goto err;
> +
Any reason to only consider ->saddr instead of checking daddr as well?
