From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
martin.lau@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Relax checks for unprivileged bpf() commands
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 17:20:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <168503522010.4912.11240829568317302879.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230524225421.1587859-1-andrii@kernel.org>
Hello:
This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:
On Wed, 24 May 2023 15:54:18 -0700 you wrote:
> During last relaxation of bpf syscall's capabilities checks ([0]), the model
> of FD-based ownership was established: if process through whatever means got
> FD for some BPF object (map, prog, etc), it should be able to perform
> operations on this object without extra CAP_SYS_ADMIN or CAP_BPF capabilities.
>
> It seems like we missed a few cases, though, in which we are still enforcing extra caps for no good reason, even though operations are not really unsafe and/or do not require any system-wide capabilities:
> - BPF_MAP_FREEZE command;
> - GET_NEXT_ID family of commands;
> - GET_INFO_BY_FD command has extra bpf_capable()-based sanitization.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [bpf-next,1/3] bpf: drop unnecessary bpf_capable() check in BPF_MAP_FREEZE command
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/c4c84f6fb2c4
- [bpf-next,2/3] bpf: don't require CAP_SYS_ADMIN for getting NEXT_ID
(no matching commit)
- [bpf-next,3/3] bpf: don't require bpf_capable() for GET_INFO_BY_FD
(no matching commit)
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-25 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-24 22:54 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Relax checks for unprivileged bpf() commands Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-24 22:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: drop unnecessary bpf_capable() check in BPF_MAP_FREEZE command Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-24 22:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf: don't require CAP_SYS_ADMIN for getting NEXT_ID Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-25 3:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-05-25 17:04 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-25 17:11 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-05-25 17:30 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-24 22:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] bpf: don't require bpf_capable() for GET_INFO_BY_FD Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-25 13:13 ` Daniel Borkmann
2023-05-25 17:20 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-25 19:49 ` Daniel Borkmann
2023-05-25 17:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=168503522010.4912.11240829568317302879.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org \
--to=patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).