[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151007060529.GA6364@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:05:29 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 10:50 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >
> >> was also thinking that we can do it only in paths that actually
> >> have multiple protocol layers, since today bpf is mainly used with
> >> tcpdump(raw_socket) and new af_packet fanout both have cb cleared
> >> on RX, because it just came out of alloc_skb and no layers were called,
> >> and on TX we can clear 20 bytes in dev_queue_xmit_nit().
> >> af_unix/netlink also have clean skb. Need to analyze tun and sctp...
> >> but it feels overly fragile to save a branch in sk_filter,
> >> so planning to go with
> >> if(unlikely(prog->cb_access)) memset in sk_filter().
> >>
> >
> > This will break TCP use of sk_filter().
> > skb->cb[] contains useful data in TCP layer.
> >
> >
>
> Since I don't know too much about the networking details:
>
> 1. Does "skb->cb" *ever* contain anything useful for an unprivileged user?
>
> 2. Does sbk->cb form a stable ABI?
>
> Unless both answers are solid yesses, then maybe the right solution is
> to just deny access entirely to unprivileged users.
So this kind of instrumentation data is not an ABI in a similar fashion as tracing
information is not an ABI either.
I.e. tracepoints can (and sometimes do) change 'semantics' - in that the
interpretation of the implementational details behind that data changes as the
implementation changes. That's not something that can ever be an ABI, just like
the contents of /proc/kcore or /proc/slabinfo can not be an ABI.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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