linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] netfilter: implement xt

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]

Message-ID: <565319EB.2090909@iogearbox.net>
Date:	Mon, 23 Nov 2015 14:51:39 +0100
From:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC:	davem@...emloft.net, pablo@...filter.org, kaber@...sh.net,
	kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, daniel.wagner@...-carit.de,
	nhorman@...driver.co, lizefan@...wei.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...com, ninasc@...com,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] netfilter: implement xt_cgroup cgroup2 path match

On 11/23/2015 02:43 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 11/21/2015 07:54 PM, Florian Westphal wrote:
>> Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 05:56:06PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
>>>>> +struct xt_cgroup_info_v1 {
>>>>> +    __u8        has_path;
>>>>> +    __u8        has_classid;
>>>>> +    __u8        invert_path;
>>>>> +    __u8        invert_classid;
>>>>> +    char        path[PATH_MAX];
>>>>> +    __u32        classid;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    /* kernel internal data */
>>>>> +    void        *priv __attribute__((aligned(8)));
>>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>> Ahem.  Am I reading this right? This struct is > 4k in size?
>>>> If so -- Ugh.  Does sizeof(path) really have to be PATH_MAX?
>>>
>>> Hmmm... yeap but would this be an acutual problem?
>>
>> Since rule blob can be allocated via vmalloc i guess "no", its not
>> really a problem unless someone needs realy insane amount of such rules.
>>
>> I don't have any better suggestion, so I guess its necessary evil.
>>
>> The only other question I have is wheter PATH_MAX might be a possible
>> ABI breaker in future.  It would have to be guaranteed that this is the
>> same size forever, else you'd get strange errors on rule insertion if
>> the sizes of the kernel and userspace version differs.
>
> Haven't looked deeply into kernfs, but if it's possible to get the object
> from the struct file eventually, you could let iptables frontend open that
> path and just pass the fd down. Would be sizeof(int) vs PATH_MAX then, i.e.
> when you have a large number of rules to load.

( ... but with the downside that things like save/restore wouldn't work. )
--
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/