diff mbox series

[1/2] libbpf: Retry map access with read-only permission

Message ID 20220530084514.10170-2-roberto.sassu@huawei.com (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series bpf: Retry access to a map in read-only mode | expand

Commit Message

Roberto Sassu May 30, 2022, 8:45 a.m. UTC
Retry map access with read-only permission, if access was denied when all
permissions were requested (open_flags is set to zero). Write access might
have been denied by the bpf_map security hook.

Some operations, such as show and dump, don't need write permissions, so
there is a good chance of success with retrying.

Prefer this solution to extending the API, as otherwise a new mechanism
would need to be implemented to determine the right permissions for an
operation.

Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
---
 tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

Comments

Daniel Borkmann May 30, 2022, 9:55 p.m. UTC | #1
On 5/30/22 10:45 AM, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> Retry map access with read-only permission, if access was denied when all
> permissions were requested (open_flags is set to zero). Write access might
> have been denied by the bpf_map security hook.
> 
> Some operations, such as show and dump, don't need write permissions, so
> there is a good chance of success with retrying.
> 
> Prefer this solution to extending the API, as otherwise a new mechanism
> would need to be implemented to determine the right permissions for an
> operation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> ---
>   tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c | 5 +++++
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> index 240186aac8e6..b4eec39021a4 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> @@ -1056,6 +1056,11 @@ int bpf_map_get_fd_by_id(__u32 id)
>   	attr.map_id = id;
>   
>   	fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_GET_FD_BY_ID, &attr, sizeof(attr));
> +	if (fd < 0) {
> +		attr.open_flags = BPF_F_RDONLY;
> +		fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_GET_FD_BY_ID, &attr, sizeof(attr));
> +	}
> +

But then what about bpf_obj_get() API in libbpf? attr.file_flags has similar
purpose as attr.open_flags in this case.

The other issue is that this could have upgrade implications, e.g. where an
application bailed out before, it is now passing wrt bpf_map_get_fd_by_id(),
but then suddenly failing during map update calls.

Imho, it might be better to be explicit about user intent w/o the lib doing
guess work upon failure cases (... or have the BPF LSM set the attr.open_flags
to BPF_F_RDONLY from within the BPF prog).

>   	return libbpf_err_errno(fd);
>   }
>   
>
Roberto Sassu May 31, 2022, 8:47 a.m. UTC | #2
> From: Daniel Borkmann [mailto:daniel@iogearbox.net]
> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2022 11:55 PM
> On 5/30/22 10:45 AM, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > Retry map access with read-only permission, if access was denied when all
> > permissions were requested (open_flags is set to zero). Write access might
> > have been denied by the bpf_map security hook.
> >
> > Some operations, such as show and dump, don't need write permissions, so
> > there is a good chance of success with retrying.
> >
> > Prefer this solution to extending the API, as otherwise a new mechanism
> > would need to be implemented to determine the right permissions for an
> > operation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> > ---
> >   tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c | 5 +++++
> >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> > index 240186aac8e6..b4eec39021a4 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> > @@ -1056,6 +1056,11 @@ int bpf_map_get_fd_by_id(__u32 id)
> >   	attr.map_id = id;
> >
> >   	fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_GET_FD_BY_ID, &attr, sizeof(attr));
> > +	if (fd < 0) {
> > +		attr.open_flags = BPF_F_RDONLY;
> > +		fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_GET_FD_BY_ID, &attr, sizeof(attr));
> > +	}
> > +
> 
> But then what about bpf_obj_get() API in libbpf? attr.file_flags has similar
> purpose as attr.open_flags in this case.

Ok, I missed it.

> The other issue is that this could have upgrade implications, e.g. where an
> application bailed out before, it is now passing wrt bpf_map_get_fd_by_id(),
> but then suddenly failing during map update calls.

Good point.

> Imho, it might be better to be explicit about user intent w/o the lib doing
> guess work upon failure cases (... or have the BPF LSM set the attr.open_flags
> to BPF_F_RDONLY from within the BPF prog).

Uhm, I don't like that the users should be aware of permissions assigned
to maps that they don't own.

Maybe, better the original idea, request read-only permission for the
list and dump operations.

Roberto

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063
Managing Director: Li Peng, Zhong Ronghua
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
index 240186aac8e6..b4eec39021a4 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
@@ -1056,6 +1056,11 @@  int bpf_map_get_fd_by_id(__u32 id)
 	attr.map_id = id;
 
 	fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_GET_FD_BY_ID, &attr, sizeof(attr));
+	if (fd < 0) {
+		attr.open_flags = BPF_F_RDONLY;
+		fd = sys_bpf_fd(BPF_MAP_GET_FD_BY_ID, &attr, sizeof(attr));
+	}
+
 	return libbpf_err_errno(fd);
 }