linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bpf, lsm: Fix getlsmprop hooks BTF IDs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a77471ed-1c18-4469-be4c-c9e00f8a3b80@t-8ch.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:25:24 +0100
From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, 
	Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@...gle.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, 
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, 
	bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, audit@...r.kernel.org, 
	selinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf, lsm: Fix getlsmprop hooks BTF IDs

On 2024-11-24 15:45:04-0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 2:19 AM Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net> wrote:
> >
> > The hooks got renamed, adapt the BTF IDs.
> > Fixes the following build warning:
> >
> >   BTFIDS  vmlinux
> > WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lsm_task_getsecid_obj
> > WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lsm_current_getsecid_subj
> >
> > Fixes: 37f670aacd48 ("lsm: use lsm_prop in security_current_getsecid")
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
> > ---
> >  kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> > index 3bc61628ab251e05d7837eb27dabc3b62bcc4783..5be76572ab2e8a0c6e18a81f9e4c14812a11aad2 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> > @@ -375,8 +375,8 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_socket_socketpair)
> >
> >  BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_syslog)
> >  BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_alloc)
> > -BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_current_getsecid_subj)
> > -BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_getsecid_obj)
> > +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_current_getlsmprop_subj)
> > +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_getlsmprop_obj)
> 
> Maybe we can remove these two instead?
> I couldn't come up with a reason for bpf_lsm to attach to these two.

Personally I have no idea about bps_lsm, how it works or how it is used.
I only tried to get rid of the warning.
If you prefer I can drop the IDs.

In my opinion this is a discussion that would have been better in
the original patch, if the CI would have caught it.


Thomas