netdev - Re: Potential issues (security and otherwise) with the current cgroup-bpf API

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: <CALCETrXY4f4Fbxv+d4QV-Tfhbc0-tJUnXph6uAdMAOofy116RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Dec 2016 21:26:22 -0800
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
        Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Potential issues (security and otherwise) with the current
 cgroup-bpf API

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 05:40:53PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> By the way, even if Alexei is right, the BPF_PROG_DETACH API doesn't
>> even take a reference to a BPF program as an argument.  What is it
>> supposed to do if this mechanism ever gets extended?
>
> we just add another field to that anonymous union just like
> we did for other commands and everything is backwards compatible.
> It's the basics of bpf syscall that we've been relying on for some
> time now and it worked just fine.

And what happens if you don't specify that member and two programs are attached?

--Andy