public inbox for linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Feng Yang <yangfeng59949@163.com>
To: casey@schaufler-ca.com
Cc: jmorris@namei.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com,
	serge@hallyn.com, yangfeng59949@163.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lsm: Fix the crash issue in xfrm_decode_session
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 10:22:08 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260319022208.69924-1-yangfeng59949@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <df35542e-d58f-47db-8a4f-92698281a69a@schaufler-ca.com>

On Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:09:47 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 3/17/2026 11:19 PM, Feng Yang wrote:
> > From: Feng Yang <yangfeng@kylinos.cn>
> >
> > After hooking the following BPF program:
> > SEC("lsm/xfrm_decode_session")
> > int BPF_PROG(lsm_hook_xfrm_decode_session, struct sk_buff *skb, u32 *secid, int ckall)
> > {
> >     return 1; // Any non-zero value
> > }
> > Subsequent packet transmission triggers will cause a kernel panic:

> LSM hooks that use or provide secids cannot be stacked. That is,
> you can't provide a BPF LSM hook and an SELinux LSM hook and expect
> correct behavior. Your proposed "fix" removes a legitimate check.

I'm very sorry, I didn't quite understand what you meant.

Maybe my commit message wasn't clear. I only used a BPF LSM hook without SELinux stacking enabled.

Therefore, is it the expected behavior that simply using
SEC("lsm/xfrm_decode_session")
int BPF_PROG(lsm_hook_xfrm_decode_session, struct sk_buff *skb, u32 *secid, int ckall) {
    return -1;
}
would cause a kernel panic? If not, and if the BUG_ON check is still necessary,
then does it mean we need to modify the return value validation logic in the BPF
verifier to ensure that only BPF programs returning 0 are accepted for this hook?

Thanks.


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-19  2:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-18  6:19 [PATCH] lsm: Fix the crash issue in xfrm_decode_session Feng Yang
2026-03-18  8:37 ` Feng Yang
2026-03-18 17:09 ` Casey Schaufler
2026-03-19  2:22   ` Feng Yang [this message]
2026-03-19 17:51     ` Casey Schaufler
2026-03-19 18:22       ` Stephen Smalley
2026-03-20  3:20         ` Feng Yang
2026-03-20  3:24         ` [PATCH RESEND] " Feng Yang
2026-03-20  3:03       ` [PATCH] " Feng Yang

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=20260319022208.69924-1-yangfeng59949@163.com \
    --to=yangfeng59949@163.com \
    --cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --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