Re: [PATCH 2/2] libxl: Reject VM config referencing nwfilters

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 9/11/24 16:24, Laine Stump wrote:
On 9/11/24 5:02 PM, Jim Fehlig via Devel wrote:
The Xen libxl driver does not support nwfilter. Add a check for nwfilters
to the devicesPostParseCallback, returning VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED if
any are found.

It's generally preferred for drivers to ignore unsupported XML features,

I would instead characterize it as "drivers generally ignore *unrecognized* XML", but it's quite common for a bit of XML that's understood and supported in one context within libvirt to generate an UNSUPPORTED error when attempting to use it in a place where it isn't supported.

but ignoring a user's request to filter VM network traffic can be viewed
as a security issue.

Definitely.


Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@xxxxxxxx>
---
  src/libxl/libxl_domain.c | 7 +++++++
  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/src/libxl/libxl_domain.c b/src/libxl/libxl_domain.c
index 0f129ec69c..2f6cebb8ae 100644
--- a/src/libxl/libxl_domain.c
+++ b/src/libxl/libxl_domain.c
@@ -131,6 +131,13 @@ libxlDomainDeviceDefPostParse(virDomainDeviceDef *dev,
                                void *opaque G_GNUC_UNUSED,
                                void *parseOpaque G_GNUC_UNUSED)
  {
+    if (dev->type == VIR_DOMAIN_DEVICE_NET && dev->data.net->filter) {
+        virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED,
+                       _("filterref is not supported in %1$s"),
+                       virDomainVirtTypeToString(def->virtType));
+        return -1;
+    }
+

This more properly should be in a function called libxlValidateDomainDeviceDef(), which would look something like qemuValidateDomainDeviceDef() and be added into libxlDomainDefParserConfig with this initialization:

         .deviceValidateCallback = libxlValidateDomainDeviceDef,

Yes, good point! The libxl driver already has domainValidateCallback, but now needs a deviceValidateCallback for this code. I'll make that change in V2.

Before sending another version, I'd like to hear opinions on Demi's question about the other hypervisor drivers. Do they need a similar change?

Regards,
Jim




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux