From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org
To: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
serge@hallyn.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf, arm64: Do not audit capability check in do_jit()
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 07:30:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <176535181104.487333.8109866817495387423.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251204125916.441021-1-omosnace@redhat.com>
Hello:
This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:
On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 13:59:16 +0100 you wrote:
> Analogically to the x86 commit 881a9c9cb785 ("bpf: Do not audit
> capability check in do_jit()"), change the capable() call to
> ns_capable_noaudit() in order to avoid spurious SELinux denials in audit
> log.
>
> The commit log from that commit applies here as well:
> """
> The failure of this check only results in a security mitigation being
> applied, slightly affecting performance of the compiled BPF program. It
> doesn't result in a failed syscall, an thus auditing a failed LSM
> permission check for it is unwanted. For example with SELinux, it causes
> a denial to be reported for confined processes running as root, which
> tends to be flagged as a problem to be fixed in the policy. Yet
> dontauditing or allowing CAP_SYS_ADMIN to the domain may not be
> desirable, as it would allow/silence also other checks - either going
> against the principle of least privilege or making debugging potentially
> harder.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- bpf, arm64: Do not audit capability check in do_jit()
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/189e5deb944a
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:[~2025-12-10 7:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-04 12:59 [PATCH] bpf, arm64: Do not audit capability check in do_jit() Ondrej Mosnacek
2025-12-10 7:30 ` 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=176535181104.487333.8109866817495387423.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org \
--to=patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.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).