From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB1D51FF1A6 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:03:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6D1171BA0F; Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:03:28 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <8c636f5c-72e1-4486-aa58-f35c4f6adae2@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:03:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Stefan Hanreich , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20251201123424.94742-1-r.obkircher@proxmox.com> <61d8eb9c-2b58-4db2-a4ad-b0b85ec0cc00@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US, de-AT From: Robert Obkircher In-Reply-To: <61d8eb9c-2b58-4db2-a4ad-b0b85ec0cc00@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1764939757996 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.070 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [firewall.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v1 pve-firewall] fix #7068: show rule comments in iptables output X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On 12/5/25 12:58, Stefan Hanreich wrote: > Tested this in a similar vein as the nftables one: > * "normal" comments > * comments that are too long > * comments that are too long and do not truncate nicely at the 255 > boundary > * comments in security groups > * emojis in comments > > afaict the PVECOMMENT: prefix is merely visual? it doesn't serve any > functional purpose? At least a quick monkey-patch removing it didn't > break anything and judging from the source code it seems fine as well. > Imo it would be fine then to completely omit it then (even in the case > where rule comments start with PVESIG). I think the parser in iptables_get_chains would at least temporarily set an invalid signature on the chain and only override it later because the real PVESIG: rule is always present and printed last. Relying on that seemed a bit sketchy. > > mb someone with more experience with perl and utf-8 can chime in on the > truncation logic? > > Tested-by: Stefan Hanreich > > On 12/1/25 1:33 PM, Robert Obkircher wrote: >> Use the iptables comment extension to include comments from the UI. >> Prefix them with "PVECOMMENT:" to avoid interfering with the existing >> "PVESIG:$sig" comments, which are used to store signatures for change >> detection. >> >> The total length of the (unescaped) comments is limited to 255 utf8 >> bytes. According to the man page it could be up to 256 characters, but >> the actual implementation seems to zero terminate the buffer before >> saving. For example, the following command produces a 255 char comment >> ending in 'a': >> iptables -A PVEFW-HOST-IN -m comment --comment $(python3 -c "print('ab'*256)") >> >> Unlike the iptables command, this version truncates to valid utf8. >> >> Signed-off-by: Robert Obkircher >> --- >> src/PVE/Firewall.pm | 17 ++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/src/PVE/Firewall.pm b/src/PVE/Firewall.pm >> index 93f8c34..688829a 100644 >> --- a/src/PVE/Firewall.pm >> +++ b/src/PVE/Firewall.pm >> @@ -2271,6 +2271,20 @@ sub ipt_gen_src_or_dst_match { >> return $match; >> } >> >> +sub print_ipt_comment { >> + my ($comment) = @_; >> + return "" if !defined($comment) || $comment eq ""; >> + $comment = encode("utf8", $comment, Encode::LEAVE_SRC); >> + $comment = "PVECOMMENT:$comment"; # avoid any confusion with PVESIG comments >> + >> + # man iptables-extensions says 256 chars, but the code only saves 255 >> + $comment = substr($comment, 0, 255); >> + $comment = encode('utf8', decode('utf8', $comment, Encode::FB_QUIET | Encode::LEAVE_SRC)); >> + >> + $comment =~ s/[\\"']/\\$1/g; # escape logic from xtables_save_string >> + return " -m comment --comment \"$comment\""; # never omit quotes because of the colon >> +} >> + >> # convert a %rule to an array of iptables commands >> sub ipt_rule_to_cmds { >> my ($rule, $chain, $ipversion, $cluster_conf, $fw_conf, $vmid) = @_; >> @@ -2375,7 +2389,8 @@ sub ipt_rule_to_cmds { >> my $logaction = get_log_rule_base($chain, $vmid, $rule->{logmsg}, $loglevel); >> push @iptcmds, "-A $chain $matchstr $logaction"; >> } >> - push @iptcmds, "-A $chain $matchstr $targetstr"; >> + my $comment = print_ipt_comment($rule->{comment}); >> + push @iptcmds, "-A $chain $matchstr $targetstr$comment"; >> return @iptcmds; >> } >> > _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel