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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 11 Jul 2022 13:48:51 +0200
From:   Artem Savkov <>
To:     Jiri Olsa <>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <>,
        Daniel Borkmann <>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <>,,,,
        Andrea Arcangeli <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf: add BPF_F_DESTRUCTIVE flag for

On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 12:56:28PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 10:32:18AM +0200, Artem Savkov wrote:
> > Add a BPF_F_DESTRUCTIVE will be required to be supplied to
> > BPF_PROG_LOAD for programs to utilize destructive helpers such as
> > bpf_panic().
> I'd think that having kernel.destructive_bpf_enabled sysctl knob enabled
> would be enough to enable that helper from any program, not sure having
> extra load flag adds more security

I agree it doesn't add more security. The idea was to have a way for a
developer to explicitly state he understand this will be dangerous. This
flag can also translate well into something like a --destructive option
for bpftrace without needing to keep a list of destructive helpers on
their side.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists