cgroup2: devices: handle eBPF skipping more correctly #2793
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
AkihiroSuda
reviewed
Feb 5, 2021
AkihiroSuda
reviewed
Feb 5, 2021
In the past we incorrectly handled eBPF errors in two ways:
1. We would only ignore errors if there was an allow rule in the list
(this doesn't make sense because for security purposes we only care
if a *deny* rule is being ignored). Arguably this is a security flaw
but you would only get an error from bpf(2) in rare cases, and thus
is not a big enough deal to go through security review.
2. If we were in a rootless container we would still return an error
even though bpf(2) is blocked for rootless containers.
Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <[email protected]>
|
@PeterCxy can you check if this fixes the issue for you? |
AkihiroSuda
previously approved these changes
Feb 5, 2021
AkihiroSuda
approved these changes
Feb 8, 2021
mrunalp
approved these changes
Feb 9, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the past we incorrectly handled eBPF errors in two ways:
We would only ignore errors if there was an allow rule in the list
(this doesn't make sense because for security purposes we only care
if a deny rule is being ignored). Arguably this is a security flaw
but you would only get an error from bpf(2) in rare cases, and thus
is not a big enough deal to go through security review.
If we were in a rootless container we would still return an error
even though bpf(2) is blocked for rootless containers.
Fixes #2792
Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai [email protected]