[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFnufp1_p8XCUf-RdHpByKnR9MfXQoDWw6Pvm_dtuH4nD6dZnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 20:35:42 +0100
From: Matteo Croce <mcroce@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf: add signature
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 8:22 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 11:18 AM Matteo Croce <mcroce@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Matteo Croce <mcroce@...rosoft.com>
> >
> > This series add signature verification for BPF files.
> > The first patch implements the signature validation in the kernel,
> > the second patch optionally makes the signature mandatory,
> > the third adds signature generation to bpftool.
>
> Matteo,
>
> I think I already mentioned that it's no-go as-is.
> We've agreed to go with John's suggestion.
Hi,
my previous attempt was loading a whole ELF file and parsing it in kernel.
In this series I just validate the instructions against a signature,
as with kernel CO-RE libbpf doesn't need to mangle it.
Which suggestion? I think I missed this one..
--
per aspera ad upstream
Powered by blists - more mailing lists