netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: reject static entry-point BPF programs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 14 May 2021 22:25:58 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: reject static entry-point BPF programs

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 4:14 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 1:34 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Detect use of static entry-point BPF programs (those with SEC() markings) and
> > emit error message.
>
> Applied. I was wondering whether you've seen such combinations ?

Haven't seen this anywhere in the real code, only tested locally by
adding static to one of selftests. Unlikely to break anyone, but good
to be as strict as with maps.