Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:03:59 +0200 | From | Daniel Borkmann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] seccomp: make underlying bpf ref counted as well |
| |
On 09/11/2015 04:44 PM, Tycho Andersen wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 03:02:36PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 09/11/2015 02:20 AM, Tycho Andersen wrote: >>> In the next patch, we're going to add a way to access the underlying >>> filters via bpf fds. This means that we need to ref-count both the >>> struct seccomp_filter objects and the struct bpf_prog objects separately, >>> in case a process dies but a filter is still referred to by another >>> process. >>> >>> Additionally, we mark classic converted seccomp filters as seccomp eBPF >>> programs, since they are a subset of what is supported in seccomp eBPF. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@canonical.com> >>> CC: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> >>> CC: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org> >>> CC: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> >>> CC: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> >>> CC: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com> >>> CC: Serge E. Hallyn <serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com> >>> CC: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> >>> CC: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> >>> --- >>> kernel/seccomp.c | 4 +++- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c >>> index 245df6b..afaeddf 100644 >>> --- a/kernel/seccomp.c >>> +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c >>> @@ -378,6 +378,8 @@ static struct seccomp_filter *seccomp_prepare_filter(struct sock_fprog *fprog) >>> } >>> >>> atomic_set(&sfilter->usage, 1); >>> + atomic_set(&sfilter->prog->aux->refcnt, 1); >>> + sfilter->prog->type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SECCOMP; >> >> So, if you do this, then this breaks the assumption of eBPF JITs >> that, currently, all classic converted BPF programs always have a >> prog->type of BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC (see: bpf_prog_was_classic()). >> >> Currently, JITs make use of this information to determine whether >> A and X mappings for such programs should or should not be cleared >> in the prologue (s390 currently). >> >> In the seccomp_prepare_filter() stage, we're already past that, so >> it will not cause an issue, but we certainly would need to be very >> careful in future, if bpf_prog_was_classic() is then used at a later >> stage when we already have a generated bpf_prog somewhere, as then >> this assumption will break. > > The only reason we need to do this is to allow BPF_DUMP_PROG to work, > since we were restricting it to only allow dumping of seccomp > programs, since those don't have maps. Instead, perhaps we could allow > dumping of BPF_PROG_TYPE_SECCOMP and BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC?
There are possibilities that BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC is calling helpers already today, at least in networking case, not seccomp. So, since you want to export [classic -> eBPF] only for seccomp, put fds on them and dump these via bpf(2), you could allow that (with a big comment stating why it's safe), but mid-term we really need to sanitize all this stuff properly as this is needed for other types, too.
| |