From: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@linux.dev>
To: sashiko@lists.linux.dev
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf, netkit: reject offloaded programs on attach
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 14:53:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <84b9cd8e-1d9e-4773-9f52-5a9eac42d7d6@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260424033752.1F76BC19425@smtp.kernel.org>
On 4/24/26 11:37 AM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s):
> - [High] The patch prevents attaching offloaded programs during link creation and program attach, but fails to secure the link update path, allowing a complete bypass of the fix.
> --
>
> commit 4b4a6a3785c138df3a0a76f92652aa68a0ea77d6
> Author: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@linux.dev>
>
> bpf, netkit: reject offloaded programs on attach
>
> This commit rejects offloaded BPF programs in netkit_prog_attach() and
> netkit_link_attach() to prevent them from triggering a WARN in
> bpf_prog_warn_on_exec() when executed on the software path.
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netkit.c b/drivers/net/netkit.c
>> index 7b56a7ad7a496..d845a24c5915d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/netkit.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/netkit.c
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -1000,6 +1003,9 @@ int netkit_link_attach(const union bpf_attr *attr, struct bpf_prog *prog)
>> struct net_device *dev;
>> int ret;
>>
>> + if (bpf_prog_is_offloaded(prog->aux))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
> Is it also necessary to reject offloaded programs in netkit_link_update()?
>
> It looks like a user could bypass this fix by creating a netkit link with a
> non-offloaded program, and then using BPF_LINK_UPDATE to replace it with an
> offloaded program.
>
> The netkit_link_update() callback directly passes the new program to
> bpf_mprog_attach() without checking bpf_prog_is_offloaded():
>
> static int netkit_link_update(struct bpf_link *link, struct bpf_prog *nprog,
> struct bpf_prog *oprog)
> {
> ...
> ret = bpf_mprog_attach(entry, &entry_new, nprog, link, oprog,
> BPF_F_REPLACE | BPF_F_ID,
> link->prog->aux->id, 0);
> ...
> }
>
> Note that tcx_link_update() in the earlier tcx fix appears to suffer from
> the exact same omission.
>
You're right, will fix netkit_link_update() in v2.
>> rtnl_lock();
>> dev = netkit_dev_fetch(current->nsproxy->net_ns,
>> attr->link_create.target_ifindex,
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-24 6:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-23 3:36 [PATCH bpf 0/2] bpf: prevent offloaded programs from running on host via tcx/netkit Jiayuan Chen
2026-04-23 3:36 ` [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf, tcx: reject offloaded programs on attach Jiayuan Chen
2026-04-24 3:37 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-24 6:53 ` Jiayuan Chen
2026-04-23 3:36 ` [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf, netkit: " Jiayuan Chen
2026-04-24 3:37 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-24 6:53 ` Jiayuan Chen [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=84b9cd8e-1d9e-4773-9f52-5a9eac42d7d6@linux.dev \
--to=jiayuan.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko@lists.linux.dev \
/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