netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/11] bpf, sockmap: Return socket cookie on lookup from syscall

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]

Date:   Mon, 13 Jan 2020 23:12:26 +0000
From:   Martin Lau <kafai@...com>
To:     Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
CC:     "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-team@...udflare.com" <kernel-team@...udflare.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/11] bpf, sockmap: Return socket cookie on
 lookup from syscall

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:50:23AM +0100, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> Tooling that populates the SOCKMAP with sockets from user-space needs a way
> to inspect its contents. Returning the struct sock * that SOCKMAP holds to
> user-space is neither safe nor useful. An approach established by
> REUSEPORT_SOCKARRAY is to return a socket cookie (a unique identifier)
> instead.
> 
> Since socket cookies are u64 values SOCKMAP needs to support such a value
> size for lookup to be possible. This requires special handling on update,
> though. Attempts to do a lookup on SOCKMAP holding u32 values will be met
> with ENOSPC error.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
> ---
>  net/core/sock_map.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/core/sock_map.c b/net/core/sock_map.c
> index d1a91e41ff82..3731191a7d1e 100644
> --- a/net/core/sock_map.c
> +++ b/net/core/sock_map.c
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>  #include <linux/skmsg.h>
>  #include <linux/list.h>
>  #include <linux/jhash.h>
> +#include <linux/sock_diag.h>
>  
>  struct bpf_stab {
>  	struct bpf_map map;
> @@ -31,7 +32,8 @@ static struct bpf_map *sock_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
>  		return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
>  	if (attr->max_entries == 0 ||
>  	    attr->key_size    != 4 ||
> -	    attr->value_size  != 4 ||
> +	    (attr->value_size != sizeof(u32) &&
> +	     attr->value_size != sizeof(u64)) ||
>  	    attr->map_flags & ~SOCK_CREATE_FLAG_MASK)
>  		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>  
> @@ -298,6 +300,23 @@ static void *sock_map_lookup(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
>  	return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
>  }
>  
> +static void *sock_map_lookup_sys(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
> +{
> +	struct sock *sk;
> +
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held());
It seems unnecessary.  It is only called by syscall.c which
holds the rcu_read_lock().  Other than that,

Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>

> +
> +	if (map->value_size != sizeof(u64))
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOSPC);
> +
> +	sk = __sock_map_lookup_elem(map, *(u32 *)key);
> +	if (!sk)
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> +
> +	sock_gen_cookie(sk);
> +	return &sk->sk_cookie;
> +}
> +