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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 20:03:55 +0200 From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs On 10/06/2015 07:50 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On 10/6/15 1:39 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >>>> [...] Also classic BPF would then need to test for it, since a socket >>>> filter >>>> doesn't really know whether native eBPF is loaded there or a >>>> classic-to-eBPF >>>> transformed one, and classic never makes use of this. Anyway, it >>>> could be done >>>> by adding a bit flag cb_access:1 to the bpf_prog, set it during eBPF >>>> verification phase, and test it inside sk_filter() if I see it >>>> correctly. >>> >>> That could also be done in an unlikely() branch, to keep the cost to >>> the non-eBPF >>> case near zero. >> >> Yes, agreed. For the time being, the majority of users are coming from the >> classic BPF side anyway and the unlikely() could still be changed later on >> if it should not be the case anymore. The flag and bpf_func would share the >> same cacheline as well. > > was also thinking that we can do it only in paths that actually > have multiple protocol layers, since today bpf is mainly used with > tcpdump(raw_socket) and new af_packet fanout both have cb cleared > on RX, because it just came out of alloc_skb and no layers were called, > and on TX we can clear 20 bytes in dev_queue_xmit_nit(). > af_unix/netlink also have clean skb. Need to analyze tun and sctp... > but it feels overly fragile to save a branch in sk_filter, > so planning to go with > if(unlikely(prog->cb_access)) memset in sk_filter(). I was also thinking that for dev_queue_xmit_nit(), since we do the skb_clone() there, to have a clone version (w/o affecting performance of the current one) that instead of copying cb[] over, it would just do a memset(). But that would just be limited to AF_PACKET, and doesn't catch all sk_filter() users. Thanks, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists