From eac7cda2114cb07031ac277c210896eb68bbd619 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:22:12 +0100
Subject: resolved: fix the rcode to SUCCESS if we find at least one matching
 RR in a DNS response

If we encounter NXDOMAIN, but find at least one matching RR in a response, then patch it to become SUCCESS. This should
clean up handling of CNAME/DNAMEs, and makes sure broken servers and those conforming to RFC 6604 are treated the same
way. The new behaviour opposes the logic suggested in RFC 6604, but given that some servers don't implement it
correctly, and given that in some ways the CNAME/DNAME chains will be incomplete anyway, and given that DNSSEC
generally only allows us to prove the first element of a CNAME/DNAME chain, this should simplify things for us.
---
 src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

(limited to 'src/resolve')

diff --git a/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c b/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c
index 77f9ef0a83..802ad860a4 100644
--- a/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c
+++ b/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c
@@ -732,6 +732,55 @@ fail:
         dns_transaction_complete(t, DNS_TRANSACTION_ERRNO);
 }
 
+static int dns_transaction_has_positive_answer(DnsTransaction *t, DnsAnswerFlags *flags) {
+        int r;
+
+        assert(t);
+
+        /* Checks whether the answer is positive, i.e. either a direct
+         * answer to the question, or a CNAME/DNAME for it */
+
+        r = dns_answer_match_key(t->answer, t->key, flags);
+        if (r != 0)
+                return r;
+
+        r = dns_answer_find_cname_or_dname(t->answer, t->key, NULL, flags);
+        if (r != 0)
+                return r;
+
+        return false;
+}
+
+static int dns_transaction_fix_rcode(DnsTransaction *t) {
+        int r;
+
+        assert(t);
+
+        /* Fix up the RCODE to SUCCESS if we get at least one matching RR in a response. Note that this contradicts the
+         * DNS RFCs a bit. Specifically, RFC 6604 Section 3 clarifies that the RCODE shall say something about a
+         * CNAME/DNAME chain element coming after the last chain element contained in the message, and not the first
+         * one included. However, it also indicates that not all DNS servers implement this correctly. Moreover, when
+         * using DNSSEC we usually only can prove the first element of a CNAME/DNAME chain anyway, hence let's settle
+         * on always processing the RCODE as referring to the immediate look-up we do, i.e. the first element of a
+         * CNAME/DNAME chain. This way, we uniformly handle CNAME/DNAME chains, regardless if the DNS server
+         * incorrectly implements RCODE, whether DNSSEC is in use, or whether the DNS server only supplied us with an
+         * incomplete CNAME/DNAME chain.
+         *
+         * Or in other words: if we get at least one positive reply in a message we patch NXDOMAIN to become SUCCESS,
+         * and then rely on the CNAME chasing logic to figure out that there's actually a CNAME error with a new
+         * lookup. */
+
+        if (t->answer_rcode != DNS_RCODE_NXDOMAIN)
+                return 0;
+
+        r = dns_transaction_has_positive_answer(t, NULL);
+        if (r <= 0)
+                return r;
+
+        t->answer_rcode = DNS_RCODE_SUCCESS;
+        return 0;
+}
+
 void dns_transaction_process_reply(DnsTransaction *t, DnsPacket *p) {
         usec_t ts;
         int r;
@@ -923,6 +972,10 @@ void dns_transaction_process_reply(DnsTransaction *t, DnsPacket *p) {
                 t->answer_dnssec_result = _DNSSEC_RESULT_INVALID;
                 t->answer_authenticated = false;
 
+                r = dns_transaction_fix_rcode(t);
+                if (r < 0)
+                        goto fail;
+
                 /* Block GC while starting requests for additional DNSSEC RRs */
                 t->block_gc++;
                 r = dns_transaction_request_dnssec_keys(t);
@@ -1635,25 +1688,6 @@ static int dns_transaction_request_dnssec_rr(DnsTransaction *t, DnsResourceKey *
         return 1;
 }
 
-static int dns_transaction_has_positive_answer(DnsTransaction *t, DnsAnswerFlags *flags) {
-        int r;
-
-        assert(t);
-
-        /* Checks whether the answer is positive, i.e. either a direct
-         * answer to the question, or a CNAME/DNAME for it */
-
-        r = dns_answer_match_key(t->answer, t->key, flags);
-        if (r != 0)
-                return r;
-
-        r = dns_answer_find_cname_or_dname(t->answer, t->key, NULL, flags);
-        if (r != 0)
-                return r;
-
-        return false;
-}
-
 static int dns_transaction_negative_trust_anchor_lookup(DnsTransaction *t, const char *name) {
         int r;
 
-- 
cgit v1.2.3-54-g00ecf