From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"ast@kernel.org" <ast@kernel.org>,
"daniel@iogearbox.net" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] sys_bpf() access control via /dev/bpf
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 21:00:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <59e56064-354c-d6b9-101a-c698976e6723@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190625205155.GD10487@mini-arch>
On 6/25/19 1:51 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 06/25, Song Liu wrote:
>> Currently, most access to sys_bpf() is limited to root. However, there are
>> use cases that would benefit from non-privileged use of sys_bpf(), e.g.
>> systemd.
>>
>> This set introduces a new model to control the access to sys_bpf(). A
>> special device, /dev/bpf, is introduced to manage access to sys_bpf().
>> Users with access to open /dev/bpf will be able to access most of
>> sys_bpf() features. The use can get access to sys_bpf() by opening /dev/bpf
>> and use ioctl to get/put permission.
>>
>> The permission to access sys_bpf() is marked by bit TASK_BPF_FLAG_PERMITTED
>> in task_struct. During fork(), child will not inherit this bit.
> 2c: if we are going to have an fd, I'd vote for a proper fd based access
> checks instead of a per-task flag, so we can do:
> ioctl(fd, BPF_MAP_CREATE, uattr, sizeof(uattr))
>
> (and pass this fd around)
>
> I do understand that it breaks current assumptions that libbpf has,
> but maybe we can extend _xattr variants to accept optinal fd (and try
> to fallback to sysctl if it's absent/not working)?
both of these ideas were discussed at lsfmm where you were present.
I'm not sure why you're bring it up again?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-25 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-25 18:22 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] sys_bpf() access control via /dev/bpf Song Liu
2019-06-25 18:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf: unprivileged BPF access " Song Liu
2019-06-26 13:32 ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-06-26 15:17 ` Song Liu
2019-06-27 0:08 ` Greg KH
2019-06-27 1:00 ` Song Liu
2019-06-27 16:37 ` Greg KH
2019-06-27 16:51 ` Song Liu
2019-06-27 17:00 ` Greg KH
2019-06-26 13:45 ` Lorenz Bauer
2019-06-26 15:19 ` Song Liu
2019-06-26 15:26 ` Lorenz Bauer
2019-06-26 16:10 ` Song Liu
2019-06-25 18:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf: sync tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h Song Liu
2019-06-25 18:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] libbpf: add libbpf_[get|put]_bpf_permission() Song Liu
2019-06-25 18:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] bpftool: use libbpf_[get|put]_bpf_permission() Song Liu
2019-06-25 20:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] sys_bpf() access control via /dev/bpf Stanislav Fomichev
2019-06-25 21:00 ` Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2019-06-25 21:19 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-06-25 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
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=59e56064-354c-d6b9-101a-c698976e6723@fb.com \
--to=ast@fb.com \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=songliubraving@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
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).