Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by DelightOne 1098 days ago
> to be secure against actively hostile code

Was that a requirement for the predecessor of eBPF: Custom kernel modules?

2 comments

Kernel modules require root privileges to load and the Linux kernel's philosophy (pre user namespaces lollllll) was that root -> kernel privesc didn't matter.
Of course it would be nice if every app can load up its own untrusted eBPF code and for the kernel to not be compromised. But why such high standards, where else is that the standard to go for? Seems perfect is the enemy of good.
I don't think "standard" is the point. It's about unlocking new features and capabilities.
eBPF is not a replacement for the general concept of custom kernel modules.