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  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]
Date:	Sat, 28 Jun 2014 18:58:50 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Steven Rostedt <>,
	Daniel Borkmann <>,
	Chema Gonzalez <>,
	Eric Dumazet <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <>,
	Jiri Olsa <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kees Cook <>,
	Linux API <>,
	Network Development <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 08/14] bpf: add eBPF verifier

On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <> wrote:
>>> Safety of eBPF programs is statically determined by the verifier, which detects:
>> This is a very high-level review.  I haven't tried to read all the
>> code yet, and this is mostly questions rather than real comments.

> These were great questions! I hope I answered them. If not, please
> continue asking.

I have plenty more questions, but here's one right now: does anything
prevent programs from using pointers in comparisons, returning
pointers, or otherwise figuring out the value of a pointer?  If so, I
think it would be worthwhile to prevent that so that eBPF programs
can't learn kernel addresses.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists