netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2 -next] tc, bpf: finalize eBPF support for cls and act front-end

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: <551D17B4.2090903@iogearbox.net>
Date:	Thu, 02 Apr 2015 12:19:32 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	stephen@...workplumber.org
CC:	ast@...mgrid.com, jiri@...nulli.us, tgraf@...g.ch,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2 -next] tc, bpf: finalize eBPF support for cls
 and act front-end

On 04/02/2015 02:29 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015, at 02:24, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 04/02/2015 02:13 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>> ...
>>> Maybe a small utility programs like:
>>>
>>> bpf (--lookup|--update|--delete|--get-next-key) -fd
>>> filedescriptor-number (type conversion parameters here) key [value]
>>>
>>> So it can be easily used by shell scripts.
>>>
>>> For that the filedescriptor numbers would need to be exported (already
>>> opened) into a spawned shell and the numbers could be specified either
>>> in environment or just by printing text which can be sourced by shells
>>> (we already talked about the maybe exec 5</proc/pid/fd/1234 idea). Seems
>>> this can be just build ontop this current patch by extending the
>>> bpf-agent you already build, no?
>>
>> I was thinking about that and trying it out, but as far as I can tell,
>> due to the anon inodes that are currently underlying as the fd provider,
>> it doesn't work w/o larger kernel changes. So, the file descriptor
>> passing
>> is currently the only way to transfer control.
>
> Does receiving them via af_unix and spawning a new shell with the fds
> already open work?

I'm probably missing something, would that need changes to bash?

I mean exec could bind an fd in the shell to sockets and use that,
for example ...

   exec 3<>/dev/tcp/www.slashdot.org/80
   echo -e "GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nhost: http://www.slashdot.org\r\nConnection: close\r\n\r\n" >&3
   cat <&3

... perhaps such a built-in fake device for retrieving bpf map fds
might be interesting, e.g. exec 4<>/dev/bpf/<obj-file>/<map-name> if
that has been given to bash?

Anyway, I think to have some utility for shell scripts, as you
suggest, certainly sounds interesting!

Thanks,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html