linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v7 5/7] libbpf: Implement BTF type sorting validation for binary search optimization

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: <CAErzpmsHFPwcm-W1aSpZ3Kv9rJLMjrVenk+Mk8Ai99NAkK0=rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 18:52:25 +0800
From: Donglin Peng <dolinux.peng@...il.com>
To: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, ast@...nel.org, zhangxiaoqin@...omi.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, 
	Donglin Peng <pengdonglin@...omi.com>, Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>, 
	Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v7 5/7] libbpf: Implement BTF type sorting validation
 for binary search optimization

On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 2:20 AM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2025-11-22 at 16:38 +0800, Donglin Peng wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 3:32 PM Donglin Peng <dolinux.peng@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 3:42 AM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2025-11-20 at 15:25 +0800, Donglin Peng wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > Additionally, in the linear search branch, I saw there is a NULL check for
> > > > > the name returned by btf__name_by_offset. This suggests that checking
> > > > > name_off == 0 alone may not be sufficient to identify an anonymous type,
> > > > > which is why I used str_is_empty for a more robust check.
> > > >
> > > > btf_str_by_offset(btf, offset) returns NULL only when 'offset' is
> > > > larger then 'btf->hdr.str_len'. However, function btf_check_meta()
> > > > verifies that this shall not happen by invoking
> > > > btf_name_offset_valid() check. The btf_check_meta() is invoked for all
> > > > types by btf_check_all_metas() called from btf_parse_base(),
> > > > btf_parse_module() and btf_parse_type_sec() -> btf_parse().
> > > >
> > > > So, it appears that kernel protects itself from invalid name_off
> > > > values at BTF load time.
> > >
> > > Right. The kernel guarantees that btf_str_by_offsetnever returns NULL,
> > > and there is no NULL check performed on the name returned by
> > > btf_find_by_name_kind. The NULL check is included in the libbpf version
> > > of the function.
> >
> > Sorry — my mistake. There’s no NULL check on the name from
> > btf_str_by_offset in the kernel’s btf_find_by_name_kind. The
> > libbpf version has it.
>
> tools/lib/bpf/btf.c:btf_sanity_check() is called from btf_new(),
> it calls btf_validate_type(), which does btf_validate_str().
> So, ignoring the NULL case on libbpf side should be safe as well.

Thanks, I also noticed that too and will drop the NULL check in the next
version.

>
> [...]