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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP01T76cOa3B5njcDtBo44s2x4WBUofu=uqeaZ-h=u0LXU8vFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Aug 2022 01:18:25 +0200
From:   Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc:     Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        andrii@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org,
        kafai@...com, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/3] Add skb + xdp dynptrs

On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 20:02, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:52 AM Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 7:32 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> > <memxor@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 02:06, Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This patchset is the 2nd in the dynptr series. The 1st can be found here [0].
> > > >
> > > > This patchset adds skb and xdp type dynptrs, which have two main benefits for
> > > > packet parsing:
> > > >     * allowing operations on sizes that are not statically known at
> > > >       compile-time (eg variable-sized accesses).
> > > >     * more ergonomic and less brittle iteration through data (eg does not need
> > > >       manual if checking for being within bounds of data_end)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Just curious: so would you be adding a dynptr interface for obtaining
> > > data_meta slices as well in the future? Since the same manual bounds
> > > checking is needed for data_meta vs data. How would that look in the
> > > generic dynptr interface of data/read/write this set is trying to fit
> > > things in?
> >
> > Oh cool, I didn't realize there is also a data_meta used in packet
> > parsing - thanks for bringing this up. I think there are 2 options for
> > how data_meta can be incorporated into the dynptr interface:
> >
> > 1) have a separate api "bpf_dynptr_from_{skb/xdp}_meta. We'll have to
> > have a function in the verifier that does something similar to
> > 'may_access_direct_pkt_data' but for pkt data meta, since skb progs
> > can have different access restrictions for data vs. data_meta.
> >
> > 2) ideally, the flags arg would be used to indicate whether the
> > parsing should be for data_meta. To support this though, I think we'd
> > need to do access type checking within the helper instead of at the
> > verifier level. One idea is to pass in the env->ops ptr as a 4th arg
> > (manually patching it from the verifier) to the helper,  which can be
> > used to determine if data_meta access is permitted.
> >
> > In both options, there'll be a new BPF_DYNPTR_{SKB/XDP}_META dynptr
> > type and data/read/write will be supported for it.
> >
> > What are your thoughts?
>
> I think separate bpf_dynptr_from_skb_meta() and
> bpf_dynptr_from_xdp_meta() is cleaner than a flag. Also having a
> separate helper would make it easier to disable this helper for
> program types that don't have access to ctx->data_meta, right?
>

Agreed, and with flags then you also need to force them to be constant
(to be able to distinguish the return type from the flag's value),
which might be too restrictive.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ