[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150904210615.GR26679@smitten>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:06:15 -0600
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@...onical.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] ebpf: add a seccomp program type
On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 01:34:12PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Tycho Andersen
> <tycho.andersen@...onical.com> wrote:
> > +static const struct bpf_func_proto *
> > +seccomp_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
> > +{
> > + /* Right now seccomp eBPF loading doesn't support maps; seccomp filters
> > + * are considered to be read-only after they're installed, so map fds
> > + * probably need to be invalidated when a seccomp filter with maps is
> > + * installed.
> > + *
> > + * The rest of these might be reasonable to call from seccomp, so we
> > + * export them.
> > + */
> > + switch (func_id) {
> > + case BPF_FUNC_ktime_get_ns:
> > + return &bpf_ktime_get_ns_proto;
> > + case BPF_FUNC_trace_printk:
> > + return bpf_get_trace_printk_proto();
> > + case BPF_FUNC_get_prandom_u32:
> > + return &bpf_get_prandom_u32_proto;
> > + case BPF_FUNC_get_smp_processor_id:
> > + return &bpf_get_smp_processor_id_proto;
> > + case BPF_FUNC_tail_call:
> > + return &bpf_tail_call_proto;
> > + case BPF_FUNC_get_current_pid_tgid:
> > + return &bpf_get_current_pid_tgid_proto;
> > + case BPF_FUNC_get_current_uid_gid:
> > + return &bpf_get_current_uid_gid_proto;
> > + case BPF_FUNC_get_current_comm:
> > + return &bpf_get_current_comm_proto;
> > + default:
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
> > +}
>
> While this list is probably fine, I don't want to mix the addition of
> eBPF functions to the seccomp ABI with the CRIU changes. No function
> calls are currently possible and it should stay that way.
Ok, I can remove them.
> I was expecting to see a validator, similar to the existing BPF
> validator that is called when creating seccomp filters currently. Can
> we add a similar validator for new BPF_PROG_TYPE_SECCOMP?
That's effectively what this patch does; when the eBPF is loaded via
bpf(), you tell bpf() you want a BPF_PROG_TYPE_SECCOMP, and it invokes
this validation/translation code, i.e. it uses
seccomp_is_valid_access() to check and make sure access are aligned
and inside struct seccomp_data.
Tycho
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists