openwrt / packages

Community maintained packages for OpenWrt. Documentation for submitting pull requests is in CONTRIBUTING.md
GNU General Public License v2.0
4.04k stars 3.5k forks source link

vpnc: skip parsing responder lifetime payload #2423

Closed ebcoelho closed 8 years ago

ebcoelho commented 8 years ago

My company upgraded its Fortigate firewall recently, and I started seeing this assertion pop when connecting to it. Looking at the debug output from vpnc, I see this:

PARSING PAYLOAD type: 0b (ISAKMP_PAYLOAD_N) next_type: 0b (ISAKMP_PAYLOAD_N) length: 0028 n.doi: 00000001 (ISAKMP_DOI_IPSEC) n.protocol: 01 (ISAKMP_IPSEC_PROTO_ISAKMP) n.spi_length: 10 n.type: 6000 (ISAKMP_N_IPSEC_RESPONDER_LIFETIME) n.spi: 66548f57 ce7a153b ab19c18b 851d4fbb n.data: 800b0001 00020004 00007080 t.attributes.type: 000b (IKE_ATTRIB_LIFE_TYPE) t.attributes.u.attr_16: 0001 (IKE_LIFE_TYPE_SECONDS) t.attributes.type: 0002 (IKE_ATTRIB_HASH) t.attributes.u.lots.length: 0004 t.attributes.u.lots.data: 00007080 DONE PARSING PAYLOAD type: 0b (ISAKMP_PAYLOAD_N)

...which makes little sense to me. The firewall is sending a IKE_ATTRIB_LIFE_TYPE with a value of seconds in it, but then it sends an attribute specifying the hash algorithm. I think this is a bug in the firewall code, and I've asked our IT people to report it to fortinet.

This patch works around the problem. In the event that we get a bogus responder lifetime payload that doesn't include a value for the lifetime, just skip parsing it instead of asserting.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton

vpnc.c | 12 +++++++++++- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/vpnc.c b/vpnc.c index 74814a6bb493..0612859e35c6 100644 --- a/vpnc.c +++ b/vpnc.c @@ -1203,7 +1203,17 @@ static void lifetime_ike_process(struct sa_block s, struct isakmp_attribute a) assert(a->af == isakmp_attr_16); assert(a->u.attr_16 == IKE_LIFE_TYPE_SECONDS || a->u.attr_16 == IKE_LIFE_TYPE_K); assert(a->next != NULL);

SOURCE: http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/vpnc-devel/2015-June/004160.html

yousong commented 8 years ago

ping maitainer of vpnc @danielg4 ;)

danielg4 commented 8 years ago

From: http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/vpnc-devel/2015-September/004170.html "I'd like to get this patch merged into Fedora as well, but they won't touch it unless it's merged into the vpnc trunk either... -- Jeff" I'm inclined to agree with Fedora here. The real problem is this: http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/vpnc-devel/2015-September/004172.html There has been a forest of patches not merged upstream, and a coherent effort to package them would effectively be a fork, which would further splinter the already ailing development. Upstream, @borneoa and @jmayer made the last commits.

yousong commented 8 years ago

I take it that this is a NAK and I am going to close this.