netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 0/6] Add eBPF hooks for cgroups

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: <57D93657.6020806@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Wed, 14 Sep 2016 13:36:55 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
CC:     Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>, htejun@...com, ast@...com,
        davem@...emloft.net, kafai@...com, fw@...len.de, harald@...hat.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, sargun@...gun.me, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/6] Add eBPF hooks for cgroups

On 09/14/2016 12:30 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 09:42:19PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> [...]
>> For us this cgroup+bpf is _not_ for filterting and _not_ for security.
>
> If your goal is monitoring, then convert these hooks not to allow to
> issue a verdict on the packet, so this becomes inoquous in the same
> fashion as the tracing infrastructure.
>
> [...]
>> I'd really love to have an alternative to bpf for such tasks,
>> but you seem to spend all the energy arguing against bpf whereas
>> nft still has a lot to be desired.
>
> Please Alexei, stop that FUD. Anyone that has spent just one day using
> the bpf tooling and infrastructure knows you have problems to
> resolve...

Not quite sure on the spreading of FUD, but sounds like we should all
get back to technical things to resolve. ;)