Linux-Security-Module Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
Cc: "open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"James Morris" <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
	"Thomas Garnier" <thgarnie@chromium.org>,
	"Michael Halcrow" <mhalcrow@google.com>,
	"Paul Turner" <pjt@google.com>,
	"Brendan Gregg" <brendan.d.gregg@gmail.com>,
	"Jann Horn" <jannh@google.com>,
	"Matthew Garrett" <mjg59@google.com>,
	"Christian Brauner" <christian@brauner.io>,
	"Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>,
	"Florent Revest" <revest@chromium.org>,
	"Brendan Jackman" <jackmanb@chromium.org>,
	"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
	"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	"Mauro Carvalho Chehab" <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Nicolas Ferre" <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	"Stanislav Fomichev" <sdf@google.com>,
	"Quentin Monnet" <quentin.monnet@netronome.com>,
	"Andrey Ignatov" <rdna@fb.com>, "Joe Stringer" <joe@wand.net.nz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/10] bpf: lsm: BTF API for LSM hooks
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 16:28:03 -0800
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzYJy40csmwfBgtD+UZY3X+hjqpQ=NwjUQ-cwy+RPF8VHA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200115171333.28811-6-kpsingh@chromium.org>

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 9:14 AM KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> From: KP Singh <kpsingh@google.com>
>
> The BTF API provides information required by the BPF verifier to
> attach eBPF programs to the LSM hooks by using the BTF information of
> two types:
>
> - struct security_hook_heads: This type provides the offset which
>   a new dynamically allocated security hook must be attached to.
> - union security_list_options: This provides the information about the
>   function prototype required by the hook.
>
> When the program is loaded:
>
> - The verifier receives the index of a member in struct
>   security_hook_heads to which a program must be attached as
>   prog->aux->lsm_hook_index. The index is one-based for better
>   verification.
> - bpf_lsm_type_by_index is used to determine the func_proto of
>   the LSM hook and updates prog->aux->attach_func_proto
> - bpf_lsm_head_by_index is used to determine the hlist_head to which
>   the BPF program must be attached.
>
> Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@google.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/bpf_lsm.h |  12 +++++
>  security/bpf/Kconfig    |   1 +
>  security/bpf/hooks.c    | 104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h b/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
> index 9883cf25241c..a9b4f7b41c65 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
> @@ -19,6 +19,8 @@ extern struct security_hook_heads bpf_lsm_hook_heads;
>
>  int bpf_lsm_srcu_read_lock(void);
>  void bpf_lsm_srcu_read_unlock(int idx);
> +const struct btf_type *bpf_lsm_type_by_index(struct btf *btf, u32 offset);
> +const struct btf_member *bpf_lsm_head_by_index(struct btf *btf, u32 id);
>
>  #define CALL_BPF_LSM_VOID_HOOKS(FUNC, ...)                     \
>         do {                                                    \
> @@ -65,6 +67,16 @@ static inline int bpf_lsm_srcu_read_lock(void)
>         return 0;
>  }
>  static inline void bpf_lsm_srcu_read_unlock(int idx) {}
> +static inline const struct btf_type *bpf_lsm_type_by_index(
> +       struct btf *btf, u32 index)
> +{
> +       return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> +}
> +static inline const struct btf_member *bpf_lsm_head_by_index(
> +       struct btf *btf, u32 id)
> +{
> +       return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> +}
>
>  #endif /* CONFIG_SECURITY_BPF */
>
> diff --git a/security/bpf/Kconfig b/security/bpf/Kconfig
> index 595e4ad597ae..9438d899b618 100644
> --- a/security/bpf/Kconfig
> +++ b/security/bpf/Kconfig
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ config SECURITY_BPF
>         depends on SECURITY
>         depends on BPF_SYSCALL
>         depends on SRCU
> +       depends on DEBUG_INFO_BTF
>         help
>           This enables instrumentation of the security hooks with
>           eBPF programs.
> diff --git a/security/bpf/hooks.c b/security/bpf/hooks.c
> index b123d9cb4cd4..82725611693d 100644
> --- a/security/bpf/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/bpf/hooks.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
>   */
>
>  #include <linux/bpf_lsm.h>
> +#include <linux/bpf.h>
> +#include <linux/btf.h>
>  #include <linux/srcu.h>
>
>  DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(security_hook_srcu);
> @@ -18,3 +20,105 @@ void bpf_lsm_srcu_read_unlock(int idx)
>  {
>         return srcu_read_unlock(&security_hook_srcu, idx);
>  }
> +
> +static inline int validate_hlist_head(struct btf *btf, u32 type_id)
> +{
> +       s32 hlist_id;
> +
> +       hlist_id = btf_find_by_name_kind(btf, "hlist_head", BTF_KIND_STRUCT);
> +       if (hlist_id < 0 || hlist_id != type_id)
> +               return -EINVAL;

This feels backwards and expensive. You already have type_id you want
to check. Do a quick look up, check type and other attributes, if you
want. There is no need to do linear search for struct named
"hlist_head".

But in reality, you should trust kernel BTF, you already know that you
found correct "security_hook_heads" struct, so its member has to be
hlist_head, no?

> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* Find the BTF representation of the security_hook_heads member for a member
> + * with a given index in struct security_hook_heads.
> + */
> +const struct btf_member *bpf_lsm_head_by_index(struct btf *btf, u32 index)
> +{
> +       const struct btf_member *member;
> +       const struct btf_type *t;
> +       u32 off, i;
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       t = btf_type_by_name_kind(btf, "security_hook_heads", BTF_KIND_STRUCT);
> +       if (WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(t)))
> +               return ERR_CAST(t);
> +
> +       for_each_member(i, t, member) {
> +               /* We've found the id requested and need to check the
> +                * the following:
> +                *
> +                * - Is it at a valid alignment for struct hlist_head?
> +                *
> +                * - Is it a valid hlist_head struct?
> +                */
> +               if (index == i) {

Also not efficient. Check index to be < vlen(t), then member =
btf_type_member(t) + index;


> +                       off = btf_member_bit_offset(t, member);
> +                       if (off % 8)
> +                               /* valid c code cannot generate such btf */
> +                               return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +                       off /= 8;
> +
> +                       if (off % __alignof__(struct hlist_head))
> +                               return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +
> +                       ret = validate_hlist_head(btf, member->type);
> +                       if (ret < 0)
> +                               return ERR_PTR(ret);
> +
> +                       return member;

This feels a bit over-cautious to double-check this. If
security_hook_heads definition is controlled by kernel sources, then
we could just trust vmlinux BTF?

> +               }
> +       }
> +
> +       return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> +}
> +
> +/* Given an index of a member in security_hook_heads return the
> + * corresponding type for the LSM hook. The members of the union
> + * security_list_options have the same name as the security_hook_heads which
> + * is ensured by the LSM_HOOK_INIT macro defined in include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> + */
> +const struct btf_type *bpf_lsm_type_by_index(struct btf *btf, u32 index)
> +{
> +       const struct btf_member *member, *hook_head = NULL;
> +       const struct btf_type *t, *hook_type = NULL;
> +       u32 i;
> +
> +       hook_head = bpf_lsm_head_by_index(btf, index);
> +       if (IS_ERR(hook_head))
> +               return ERR_PTR(PTR_ERR(hook_head));
> +
> +       t = btf_type_by_name_kind(btf, "security_list_options", BTF_KIND_UNION);
> +       if (WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(t)))
> +               return ERR_CAST(t);

btf_type_by_name_kind() is a linear search (at least right now), so it
might be a good idea to cache found type_id's of security_list_options
and security_hook_heads?

> +
> +       for_each_member(i, t, member) {
> +               if (hook_head->name_off == member->name_off) {
> +                       /* There should be only one member with the same name
> +                        * as the LSM hook. This should never really happen
> +                        * and either indicates malformed BTF or someone trying
> +                        * trick the LSM.
> +                        */
> +                       if (WARN_ON(hook_type))
> +                               return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +
> +                       hook_type = btf_type_by_id(btf, member->type);
> +                       if (unlikely(!hook_type))
> +                               return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +
> +                       if (!btf_type_is_ptr(hook_type))
> +                               return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +               }
> +       }
> +
> +       if (!hook_type)
> +               return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> +
> +       t = btf_type_by_id(btf, hook_type->type);
> +       if (unlikely(!t))
> +               return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);

why not do this inside the loop when you find correct member and not
continue processing all the fields?

> +
> +       return t;
> +}
> --
> 2.20.1
>

  reply index

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-15 17:13 [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/10] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI) KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/10] bpf: btf: Make some of the API visible outside BTF KP Singh
2020-01-18 12:44   ` kbuild test robot
2020-01-20 11:00     ` KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 02/10] bpf: lsm: Add a skeleton and config options KP Singh
2020-01-16  7:04   ` Casey Schaufler
2020-01-16 12:52     ` KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 03/10] bpf: lsm: Introduce types for eBPF based LSM KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/10] bpf: lsm: Add mutable hooks list for the BPF LSM KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:30   ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-16  9:48     ` KP Singh
2020-01-16  6:33   ` Casey Schaufler
2020-01-16 10:19     ` KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/10] bpf: lsm: BTF API for LSM hooks KP Singh
2020-01-17  0:28   ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2020-01-20 11:10     ` KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 06/10] bpf: lsm: Implement attach, detach and execution KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:24   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-01-16  9:45     ` KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/10] bpf: lsm: Make the allocated callback RO+X KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 08/10] tools/libbpf: Add support for BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM KP Singh
2020-01-15 21:19   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-15 21:37     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-16 12:49     ` KP Singh
2020-01-16 17:26       ` KP Singh
2020-01-16 19:10       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-17 22:16         ` KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 09/10] bpf: lsm: Add selftests " KP Singh
2020-01-15 17:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 10/10] bpf: lsm: Add Documentation KP Singh
2020-01-15 22:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/10] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI) Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-20 11:12   ` KP Singh
2020-01-16 10:03 ` Brendan Jackman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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='CAEf4BzYJy40csmwfBgtD+UZY3X+hjqpQ=NwjUQ-cwy+RPF8VHA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=brendan.d.gregg@gmail.com \
    --cc=christian@brauner.io \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jackmanb@chromium.org \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=joe@wand.net.nz \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhalcrow@google.com \
    --cc=mic@digikod.net \
    --cc=mjg59@google.com \
    --cc=nicolas.ferre@microchip.com \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=quentin.monnet@netronome.com \
    --cc=rdna@fb.com \
    --cc=revest@chromium.org \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=thgarnie@chromium.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /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

Linux-Security-Module Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/0 linux-security-module/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-security-module linux-security-module/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module \
		linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-security-module

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git