netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 07/14] bpf: expand BPF syscall with program load/unload

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:39:31 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
	Chema Gonzalez <chema@...gle.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 07/14] bpf: expand BPF syscall with program load/unload

On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:26:14AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> wrote:
>>> > If you want to add GPL-only functions in the future, that would be one
>>> > thing.  But if someone writes a nice eBPF compiler, and someone else
>>> > writes a little program that filters on network packets, I see no
>>> > reason to claim that the little program is a derivative work of the
>>> > kernel and therefore must be GPL.
>>>
>>> I think we have to draw a line somewhere. Say, tomorrow I want
>>> to modify libpcap to emit eBPF based on existing tcpdump syntax.
>>> Would it mean that tcpdump filter strings are GPLed? Definitely not,
>>> since they existed before and can function without new libpcap.
>>> But if I write a new packet filtering program in C, compile it
>>> using LLVM->eBPF and call into in-kernel helper functions
>>> (like bpf_map_lookup_elem()),  I think it's exactly the derivative work.
>>> It's analogous to kernel modules. If module wants to call
>>> export_symbol_gpl() functions, it needs to be GPLed. Here all helper
>>> functions are GPL. So we just have a blank check for eBPF program.
>>
>> I agree, these eBFP programs should be GPL-compatible licensed as well.
>
> I think I'd be happy with an export_symbol_gpl analogue.  I might
> argue that bpf_map_lookup_elem shouldn't be gpl-only, though.

ok. sounds like module-like approach will be more acceptable to potential
user base. Will change it. Last thing I want to do is to scary users away.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html