Commit bfeb7e39 authored by Yauheni Kaliuta's avatar Yauheni Kaliuta Committed by Daniel Borkmann

bpf: Use bpf_capable() instead of CAP_SYS_ADMIN for blinding decision

The full CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement for blinding looks too strict nowadays.
These days given unprivileged BPF is disabled by default, the main users
for constant blinding coming from unprivileged in particular via cBPF -> eBPF
migration (e.g. old-style socket filters).
Signed-off-by: default avatarYauheni Kaliuta <ykaliuta@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220831090655.156434-1-ykaliuta@redhat.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220905090149.61221-1-ykaliuta@redhat.com
parent a02c118e
......@@ -102,6 +102,9 @@ Values:
- 1 - enable JIT hardening for unprivileged users only
- 2 - enable JIT hardening for all users
where "privileged user" in this context means a process having
CAP_BPF or CAP_SYS_ADMIN in the root user name space.
bpf_jit_kallsyms
----------------
......
......@@ -1099,7 +1099,7 @@ static inline bool bpf_jit_blinding_enabled(struct bpf_prog *prog)
return false;
if (!bpf_jit_harden)
return false;
if (bpf_jit_harden == 1 && capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
if (bpf_jit_harden == 1 && bpf_capable())
return false;
return true;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment