Re: kernel BUG at net/key/af_key.c:LINE!

[Herbert Xu]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 01:04:59PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
> By castrating the reproducer to not perform a pfkey dump I have
> captured the corrupted policy via xfrm:
> 
> src ???/0 dst ???/0 uid 0
>         socket in action allow index 2083 priority 0 ptype main share any flag  (0x00000000)
>         lifetime config:
>           limit: soft 0(bytes), hard 0(bytes)
>           limit: soft 0(packets), hard 0(packets)
>           expire add: soft 0(sec), hard 0(sec)
>           expire use: soft 0(sec), hard 0(sec)
>         lifetime current:
>           0(bytes), 0(packets)
>           add 2017-11-10 09:58:17 use 2017-11-10 09:58:20
>         tmpl src ac14:bb:: dst ::
>                 proto 0 spi 0x00000000(0) reqid 0(0x00000000) mode transport
>                 level 5 share any 
>                 enc-mask 00000000 auth-mask 00000000 comp-mask 00000000
> 
> For comparison here is a good policy that was also created by the
> reproducer:
> 
> src fe80::bb/0 dst ::/0 uid 0
>         socket in action allow index 2083 priority 0 ptype main share any flag  (0x00000000)
>         lifetime config:
>           limit: soft 0(bytes), hard 0(bytes)
>           limit: soft 0(packets), hard 0(packets)
>           expire add: soft 0(sec), hard 0(sec)
>           expire use: soft 0(sec), hard 0(sec)
>         lifetime current:
>           0(bytes), 0(packets)
>           add 2017-11-10 09:58:17 use 2017-11-10 09:58:17
>         tmpl src ac14:bb:: dst ::
>                 proto 0 spi 0x00000000(0) reqid 0(0x00000000) mode transport
>                 level 5 share any 
>                 enc-mask 00000000 auth-mask 00000000 comp-mask 00000000

Oh and this is an important clue.  We have two policies with
identical index values.  The index value is meant to be unique
so clearly something funny is going on.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt