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  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, 25 May 2020 14:15:32 +0200
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <>
To:     David Ahern <>, David Ahern <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/4] bpf: Add support for XDP programs in DEVMAPs

David Ahern <> writes:

> On 5/22/20 9:59 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> David Ahern <> writes:
>>> Implementation of Daniel's proposal for allowing DEVMAP entries to be
>>> a device index, program id pair. Daniel suggested an fd to specify the
>>> program, but that seems odd to me that you insert the value as an fd, but
>>> read it back as an id since the fd can be closed.
>> While I can be sympathetic to the argument that it seems odd, every
>> other API uses FD for insert and returns ID, so why make it different
>> here? Also, the choice has privilege implications, since the CAP_BPF
>> series explicitly makes going from ID->FD a more privileged operation
>> than just querying the ID.
> I do not like the model where the kernel changes the value the user
> pushed down.

Yet it's what we do in every other interface where a user needs to
supply a program, including in prog array maps. So let's not create a
new inconsistent interface here...


Powered by blists - more mailing lists