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  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:   Sat, 4 Feb 2017 20:05:03 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] bpf: add bpf_sk_netns_id() helper

On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 07:33:14PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
> <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 09:15:10AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com> wrote:
> >> > Note that all bpf programs types are global.
> >>
> >> I don't think this has a clear enough meaning to work with.  In
> >
> > Please clarify what you mean. The quoted part says
> > "bpf programs are global". What is not "clear enough" there?
> 
> What does "bpf programs are global" mean?  I am genuinely unable to
> figure out what you mean.  Here are some example guesses of what you
> might mean:
> 
>  - BPF programs are compiled independently of a namespace.  This is
> certainly true, but I don't think it matters.
> 
>  - You want BPF programs to affect everything on the system.  But this
> doesn't seem right to be -- they only affect things in the relevant
> cgroup, so they're not global in that sense.

All bpf program types are global in the sense that you can
make all of them to operate across all possible scopes and namespaces.
cgroup only gives a scope for the program to run, but it's
not limited by it. The user can have the same program
attached to two or more different cgroups, so one program
will run across multiple cgroups.

>  - The set of BPF program types and the verification rules are
> independent of cgroup and namespace.  This is true, but I don't think
> it matters.

It matters. That's actually the key to understand. The loading part
verifies correctness for particular program type.
Afterwards the same program can be attached to any place.
Including different cgroups and different namespaces.
The 'attach' part is like 'switch on' that enables program
on particular hook. The scope (whether it's socket or netdev or cgroup)
is a scope that program author uses to narrow down the hook,
but it's not an ultimate restriction.
For example the socket program can be attached to sockets and
share information with cls_bpf program attached to netdev.
The kprobe tracing program can peek into kernel internal data
and share it with cls_bpf or any other type as long as
everything is root. The information flow is global to the whole system.

> Because we're one week or so from 4.10 final, the 4.10-rc code is
> problematic even for ip vrf, and there isn't a clear solution yet.
> There are a bunch of requirements that seem to conflict, and something
> has to give.

let's go back to the beginning:
- you've identified a 'malfunction' in ip vrf. It's valid one. Thank you.
- can it be fixed without kernel changes ? Yes. David offered to do so.
- can kernel make it easier to address? Yes. I posted v1.
- proposed sk->netns_inum v1 patch together with posted iproute2 change
addresses the 'malfunction' ? Yes, but Eric didn't like inode only. All fair.
- proposed bpf_sk_netns_id() v3 patch together with upcoming iproute2
change will address it? Yes.

What's not to like? There were several clear solutions.
The last one seems to be the best.
And the sooner it lands the faster I can add override disable flag.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ