RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1829820 - nfnl_osf fails to load signatures
Summary: nfnl_osf fails to load signatures
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: iptables
Version: 7.8
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Phil Sutter
QA Contact: Tomas Dolezal
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1837367
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-04-30 12:33 UTC by Lev Veyde
Modified: 2020-09-29 20:39 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: iptables-1.4.21-35.el7
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1837367 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-09-29 20:39:23 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2020:4023 0 None None None 2020-09-29 20:39:27 UTC

Description Lev Veyde 2020-04-30 12:33:09 UTC 
Description of problem:
nfnl_osf seems to halt right at the first signature, and thus fails to load them into the kernel.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
iptables-utils-1.4.21-34.el7.x86_64

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. install iptables-utils in order to get the nfnl_osf tool
# yum install iptables-utils

2. run the nfnl_osf to load the signatures
# nfnl_osf -f /usr/share/xtables/pf.os

3. the tool seems to show the first signature and stuck there

Actual results:
tool get stuck at the first signature rule loading

Expected results:
all rules from the signature file should be loaded successfully

Additional info:

After the failed load attempt, the first attempt of signature rule removal w/:
nfnl_osf -f /usr/share/xtables/pf.os -d

will also get stuck. Then on additional attempts it seems not to hang, but returns w/ returncode of 255.


strace says it's get stuck on loads w/:

sendto(3, {{len=616, type=NFNL_SUBSYS_OSF<<8|OSF_MSG_ADD, flags=NLM_F_REQUEST|0x400, seq=1588249244, pid=0}, {nfgen_family=AF_UNSPEC, version=NFNETLINK_V0, res_id=htons(0), {{nla_len=596, nla_type=NFNETLINK_V1}, "\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x40\x00\x00\x40\x00\x3c\x00\x00\x00\x06\x00\x41\x49\x58\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00"...}}, 616, 0, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, nl_pid=0, nl_groups=00000000}, 12) = 616

recvfrom(3, 0x7ffc95bd5790, 8192, 0, 0x7ffc95bd5760, [12]) = ? ERESTARTSYS (To be restarted if SA_RESTART is set)


first remove attempt:
sendto(3, {{len=616, type=NFNL_SUBSYS_OSF<<8|OSF_MSG_REMOVE, flags=NLM_F_REQUEST, seq=1588249531, pid=0}, {nfgen_family=AF_UNSPEC, version=NFNETLINK_V0, res_id=htons(0), {{nla_len=596, nla_type=NFNETLINK_V1}, "\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x40\x00\x00\x40\x00\x3c\x00\x00\x00\x06\x00\x41\x49\x58\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00"...}}, 616, 0, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, nl_pid=0, nl_groups=00000000}, 12) = 616

recvfrom(3, 0x7ffc5a7e9d80, 8192, 0, 0x7ffc5a7e9d50, [12]) = ? ERESTARTSYS (To be restarted if SA_RESTART is set)

second remove attempt:
sendto(3, {{len=616, type=NFNL_SUBSYS_OSF<<8|OSF_MSG_REMOVE, flags=NLM_F_REQUEST, seq=1588249615, pid=0}, {nfgen_family=AF_UNSPEC, version=NFNETLINK_V0, res_id=htons(0), {{nla_len=596, nla_type=NFNETLINK_V1}, "\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x40\x00\x00\x40\x00\x3c\x00\x00\x00\x06\x00\x41\x49\x58\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00"...}}, 616, 0, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, nl_pid=0, nl_groups=00000000}, 12) = 616

recvfrom(3, {{len=636, type=NLMSG_ERROR, flags=0, seq=1588249615, pid=17599}, {error=-ENOENT, msg={{len=616, type=NFNL_SUBSYS_OSF<<8|OSF_MSG_REMOVE, flags=NLM_F_REQUEST, seq=1588249615, pid=0}, {nfgen_family=AF_UNSPEC, version=NFNETLINK_V0, res_id=htons(0), {{nla_len=596, nla_type=NFNETLINK_V1}, "\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x40\x00\x00\x40\x00\x3c\x00\x00\x00\x06\x00\x41\x49\x58\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00"...}}}}, 8192, 0, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, nl_pid=0, nl_groups=00000000}, [12]) = 636

close(4)                                = 0

munmap(0x7f335b112000, 4096)            = 0

close(3)                                = 0

exit_group(-1)                          = ?
+++ exited with 255 +++
Comment 2 Phil Sutter 2020-05-09 11:55:35 UTC 
Hi!

Yes, I broke it. :(

Fix sent upstream: https://lore.kernel.org/netfilter-devel/20200509115200.19480-2-phil@nwl.cc/
Found another problem in delete functionality while debugging the above, fixed as well: https://lore.kernel.org/netfilter-devel/20200509115200.19480-3-phil@nwl.cc/
Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2020-09-29 20:39:23 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (iptables bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:4023
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.