Re: [PATCH] netfilter: xt_policy: add NULL check for skb_dst() in output policy match
From: Florian Westphal
Date: Thu Oct 29 2026 - 18:22:08 EST
Florian Westphal <fw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[ CC Nik ]
> netdev-bot+sashiko@xxxxxxxxxx <netdev-bot+sashiko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Is this statement accurate? There seems to be a reachable path through
> > br_netfilter on a bridge port that has vlan_tunnel enabled.
> >
> > net/bridge/br_vlan_tunnel.c:br_handle_egress_vlan_tunnel() {
> > ...
> > tunnel_id = READ_ONCE(vlan->tinfo.tunnel_id);
> > if (!tunnel_id || unlikely(!skb_vlan_tag_present(skb)))
> > return 0;
> >
> > skb_dst_drop(skb);
> > ...
> > tunnel_dst = rcu_dereference(vlan->tinfo.tunnel_dst);
> > if (tunnel_dst && dst_hold_safe(&tunnel_dst->dst))
> > skb_dst_set(skb, &tunnel_dst->dst);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
Hmm, Nik can you please have a look? Its strange that we don't return
an error. dst was dropped, tunnel dst disappeared, hwaccel tag was
cleared.
Should this return 0 only if skb_dst_set() was called?
Afaics then callers would toss the skb and we won't pass this
to inet netfilter hooks.
The original code had an unconditional skb_dst_set(),
assuming tunnel_dst is always there.
That changed with
cfc579f9d89a ("net: bridge: fix vlan tunnel dst refcnt when egressing")
fixup.
I'll quote more from report verbatim below for context.
> > So a forwarder can read the old non-zero tunnel_id and then find
> > tunnel_dst NULL, or holding a dst that dst_hold_safe() rejects. The skb
> > then goes on like this:
> >
> > __br_forward()
> > br_handle_vlan()
> > br_handle_egress_vlan_tunnel() <- dst dropped, none attached
> > NF_HOOK(NFPROTO_BRIDGE, NF_BR_FORWARD, ...)
> > br_nf_forward()
> > br_nf_forward_ip()
> > NF_HOOK(pf, NF_INET_FORWARD, ...)
> > ipt_do_table() / ip6t_do_table()
> > policy_mt()
> > match_policy_out() <- dst == NULL
> >
> > br_nf_post_routing() does the same for POSTROUTING, and
> > policy_mt_check_hooks() allows --dir out in both hooks.
> >
> > The trigger needs a VLAN-filtering bridge with a vlan_tunnel port,
> > bridge-nf-call-iptables (or ip6tables) enabled, a "-m policy --dir out"
> > rule in FORWARD or POSTROUTING, and a tunnel mapping delete racing with
> > forwarded traffic. Given that, the pre-patch code would oops in softirq
> > context.
> >
> > Could the commit message describe this path, so the change is not taken
> > as purely defensive?