Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

Bug #12440

closed

Zero-value prefix IPv6 addresses are mishandled

Added by Steve Wheeler about 3 years ago. Updated over 2 years ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Viktor Gurov
Category:
Web Interface
Target version:
2.7.0
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:
Plus Target Version:
22.05
Release Notes:
Default
Affected Version:
2.5.2
Affected Architecture:
All

Description

Zero-value prefix IPv6 addresses on the type ::/96 are mishandled when used in pfSense firewall or NAT rules.

For example an address such as ::192.168.10.10 used in a NAT rule:

        <rule>
            <source>
                <any></any>
            </source>
            <destination>
                <address>::192.168.10.10</address>
                <port>45678</port>
            </destination>
            <ipprotocol>inet6</ipprotocol>
            <protocol>tcp</protocol>
            <target>::10:0001</target>
            <local-port>45678</local-port>
            <interface>wan</interface>
            <descr><![CDATA[v6 test]]></descr>
            <associated-rule-id>nat_614dcdfc0fb0d6.83146982</associated-rule-id>
            <created>
                <time>1632488956</time>
                <username><![CDATA[admin@172.21.16.5 (Local Database)]]></username>
            </created>
            <updated>
                <time>1633728663</time>
                <username><![CDATA[admin@172.21.16.5 (Local Database)]]></username>
            </updated>
        </rule>

Results in a generated pf rule:
rdr on vtnet0 inet6 proto tcp from any to ::1921681010 port 45678 -> ::10:0001

That is invalid and prevents the ruleset loading:

There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:79: could not parse host specification - The line in question reads [79]: rdr on vtnet0 inet6 proto tcp from any to ::1921681010 port 45678 -> ::10:0001
@ 2021-10-08 23:13:08

IPv6 addresses of that format appear to be deprecated though pf itself appears to be able to handle them.

Either the input validation should should reject zero prefix addresses or the ruleset should be created correctly to include them.

Actions
Copy link
 #1

Updated by Viktor Gurov about 3 years ago

Steve Wheeler wrote:

IPv6 addresses of that format appear to be deprecated though pf itself appears to be able to handle them.

Either the input validation should should reject zero prefix addresses or the ruleset should be created correctly to include them.

Firewall rules with zero prefix can be used with dynamic delegated prefix, see #6626

Actions
Copy link
 #2

Updated by Viktor Gurov about 3 years ago

fix:
https://gitlab.netgate.com/pfSense/pfSense/-/merge_requests/469

example:
fw rule on IPv6 interface with fc00:88::99 address for ::192.168.10.10 dst address:

pass  in  quick  on $LAN inet6 proto tcp  from any to fc00:88::c0a8:a0a port 636 tracker 1637420076 flags S/SA keep state  label "USER_RULE"

Actions
Copy link
 #3

Updated by Jim Pingle about 3 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Pull Request Review
  • Assignee set to Viktor Gurov
Actions
Copy link
 #4

Updated by Jim Pingle almost 3 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.6.0 to CE-Next
  • Plus Target Version changed from 22.01 to 22.05
Actions
Copy link
 #5

Updated by Marcos M almost 3 years ago

Tested on 22.05.a.20220311.0600 with the patch.

The IP ::192.168.10.10 and ::ffff:192.168.10.10 is being converted to 0:c0a8:a0a which results in the error:

There were error(s) loading the rules: no IP address found for 0:c0a8:a0a - The line in question reads [0]: @ 2022-03-13 10:11:59

Actions
Copy link
 #6

Updated by Viktor Gurov almost 3 years ago

Marcos Mendoza wrote in #note-5:

Tested on 22.05.a.20220311.0600 with the patch.

The IP ::192.168.10.10 and ::ffff:192.168.10.10 is being converted to 0:c0a8:a0a which results in the error:

There were error(s) loading the rules: no IP address found for 0:c0a8:a0a - The line in question reads [0]: @ 2022-03-13 10:11:59

Fixed, please retest the updated MR

Actions
Copy link
 #7

Updated by Viktor Gurov almost 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Pull Request Review to Feedback
  • Target version changed from CE-Next to 2.7.0
Actions
Copy link
 #8

Updated by Jim Pingle almost 3 years ago

  • Subject changed from zero-value prefix IPv6 addresses are mishandled. to Zero-value prefix IPv6 addresses are mishandled

Updating subject for release notes.

Actions
Copy link
 #9

Updated by Viktor Gurov over 2 years ago

  • % Done changed from 0 to 100
Actions
Copy link
 #10

Updated by Christopher Cope over 2 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Resolved

Testes and working as expected on

22.05-BETA (amd64)
built on Fri May 13 06:28:24 UTC 2022
FreeBSD 12.3-STABLE

Marking resolved.

Actions
Copy link

Also available in: Atom PDF