netdev - Re: [PATCH nf-next] netfilter: xt

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: <20161205232214.GA15825@salvia>
Date:   Tue, 6 Dec 2016 00:22:14 +0100
From:   Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH nf-next] netfilter: xt_bpf: support ebpf

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 06:06:05PM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
[...]
> Eric also suggests a private variable to avoid being subject to
> changes to PATH_MAX. Then we can indeed also choose an arbitrary lower
> length than current PATH_MAX.

Good.

> FWIW, there is a workaround for users with deeply nested paths: the
> path passed does not have to be absolute. It is literally what is
> passed on the command line to iptables right now, including relative
> addresses.

If iptables userspace always expects to have the bpf file repository
in some given location (suggesting to have a directory that we specify
at ./configure time, similar to what we do with connlabel.conf), then
I think we can rely on relative paths. Would this be flexible enough
for your usecase?