Simplifying FedRAMP Compliance with Teleport
Jun 27
Register Today
Teleport logo

Teleport Blog - Preventing Data Exfiltration with eBPF - Jul 22, 2021

Preventing Data Exfiltration with eBPF

by Eugene Yakubovich

Preventing Data Exfiltration with eBPF

The need for data exfiltration prevention

To keep your business secure, it is important not only to keep the hackers from getting in but also to keep your data from getting out. Even if a malicious actor gains access to the server, for example via an SSH session, it is vital to keep the data from being exfiltrated to an unauthorized location, such as IP addresses not under your organization’s control. In considering a solution to protect against data exfiltration, it is critical to note that one policy does not fit all.

Consider a service invoking webhooks. It will be running with limited data access but must be able to communicate with the entire Internet. Contrast that to an SSH session that’s been opened for troubleshooting purposes. It will have access to the entire machine but does not egress to an arbitrary IP.

Before we dive into looking at the possible solutions, there’s another wrinkle to consider. The address space that defines the allow or deny policy is likely to change. It will happen either due to changing IP space used by the organization or because more rogue addresses are discovered.

Static configuration solutions

There are several solutions to this problem. For example, to apply a policy to SSH sessions, we could move the ssh daemon to its own cgroup and use iptables or nftables to define rules that apply just to that cgroup. Another option is to use a security module, such as AppArmor to specify a network policy for sshd. However these solutions work best when configured statically during the provisioning of the machine. When deployed across a fleet of machines and in the face of changing policies, they become brittle to operate.

KRSI: the new kid on the block

Google recently merged a new technology into the Linux kernel that provides us with another avenue to explore. It’s called Kernel Runtime Security Instrumentation (KRSI) and it combines two existing technologies that makes it possible to define security policies on the fly. The first puzzle piece is the Linux Security Module framework -- a set of hooks sprinkled throughout the kernel that are used by the likes of AppArmor and SELinux. These hooks are placed in code paths where a security decision may be warranted. Specific security solutions are able to apply their policies at these customization points.

The second piece is eBPF -- a way to write code in C (or Rust), compile it to bytecode and inject into the kernel. This is similar to a kernel module except that it’s safer and easier to deploy. The safety comes from a verifier which validates the eBPF program prior to accepting it. Therefore it guarantees that the code will not crash or lock up the kernel. The ease of deployment comes from increased portability of the code. Unlike a regular module which must be compiled to a particular kernel version, eBPF programs can target many kernel versions at once. Finally, eBPF supports a variety of data structures, called BPF maps, such as arrays, hash maps, and trie maps which are visible simultaneously to a userspace daemon and an eBPF program. This makes pushing data into the kernel as easy as updating a map entry.

KRSI allows implementing LSM hooks using eBPF. By leveraging a BPF trie map, we can store and dynamically update CIDR ranges for the LSM hooks to enforce. Let’s go through how a BPF program that hooks the socket’s connect() call would work. The first step is to include the necessary headers and boilerplate:

#include <linux/errno.h>
#include "vmlinux.h"
#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>  /* most used helpers: SEC, __always_inline, etc */
#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>  /* for BPF_PROG macro */

#define AF_INET  2        	  /* IP protocol family.*/

char LICENSE[] SEC("license") = "Dual BSD/GPL";

Next we define a BPF trie map to store a list of CIDR ranges to be denied. This trie is easily accessible in the eBPF code (in the kernel) as well via a userspace API. We’ll be using the trie map as a “set” so the mapped value can be ignored (we’ll just use char as the value type).

The key consists of a 32-bit unsigned integer that specifies the length of the prefix in bits (e.g. 16 in CIDR range) followed by the 32-bit IP address. The definition of the BPF trie looks a bit cryptic but it just instantiates a struct in the .maps section of the ELF binary. The userspace libbpf library will use this information to issue the necessary system calls to create the trie.

// IPv4 addr/mask to store in the trie
struct ip4_trie_key {
	u32 prefixlen;    	// first member must be u32
	struct in_addr addr;  // rest can are arbitrary

// Define a longest prefix match trie.
// The key is the struct above and we ignore the value
struct {
	__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_LPM_TRIE);
	__uint(max_entries, 128);
	__type(key, struct ip4_trie_key);
	__type(value, char);
	__uint(map_flags, BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC);
} denylist SEC(".maps");

Now we are ready to look at the LSM hook implementation. Every time a process tries to connect a socket, this BPF program will be called. It takes the passed in socket address and matches it against the prefixes stored in the denylist trie. If the match is successful, it returns -EPERM (permission denied) error. Otherwise it returns 0 to signify no error:

int BPF_PROG(socket_connect, struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *address, int addrlen) {
	// Only care about IPv4 in this example
	if (address->sa_family != AF_INET)
    		return 0;

	// Cast to IPv4 socket address
	struct sockaddr_in *inet_addr = (struct sockaddr_in*)address;

	// Form the key to lookup in the denylist trie
	struct ip4_trie_key key = {
    		.prefixlen = 32,
    		.addr = inet_addr->sin_addr

	// If the key matches a prefix in the deny list, deny the call
	if (bpf_map_lookup_elem(&denylist, &key))
    		return -EPERM;

	return 0;

Userspace daemon

This BPF program needs to be paired with a userspace daemon. Its job will be to load the program into the kernel and manage the deny list to adapt to the changes in the environment. For this example, we’ll write the daemon in Go and use libbpfgo library (a Go wrapper around C libbpf library) to handle the low level mechanics of loading the BPF objects into the kernel.

Assuming that the BPF C program was compiled into a demo.bpf.o object file, the Go program will use the new “embed” mechanism in Go 1.16 to attach the BPF program as a byte array into the executable. The first thing main() does is to pass the mentioned byte array to libbpfgo for it to get it ready to load into the kernel that we do in step two:

//go:embed demo.bpf.o
var bytecode []byte

func main() {
// Step 1: Create a module from the BPF bytecode embedded in the executable
mod, err := libbpfgo.NewModuleFromBuffer(bytecode, "demo")

// Step 2: Load the BPF program into the kernel. The kernel will validate the bytecode
// and get it ready for attaching it to the hook.
err = mod.BPFLoadObject()

Before we attach to the LSM hook, we want to populate the BPF trie map that stores our deny list.

Step 3 below asks the module to get us the map object and Step 4 inserts a single entry into the map. While we choose to populate the deny list prior to attaching the hook, it’s not necessary. In fact, the BPF trie map, like all BPF maps, can be modified at any time, critical for a solution designed to update the policies on the fly.

// Step 3: Grap the handle to the BPF trie map
denylist, err := mod.GetMap("denylist")

// Step 4: Insert an entry (CIDR range) into the map. The second parameter to
// Update is the value and is not used by the BPF program.
// See below for definitions of ‘toKey’ function.
toDeny := mustParseCIDR("")
err = denylist.Update(toKey(toDeny), uint8(0))

The final step asks for the BPF program object and attaches it to the LSM hook. For demo purposes, our program sleeps after this step since everything is unloaded when the process exits.

// Step 5: Grab the handle to the BPF program
prog, err := mod.GetProgram("socket_connect")

// Step 6: Attach the program to the LSM hook. Which hook was specified in the C file
// via the section name: SEC("lsm/socket_connect")
_, err = prog.AttachLSM()

// Step 7: Keep the process running

func toKey(n net.IPNet) []byte {
	prefixLen, _ := n.Mask.Size()

	// Key format: Prefix length (4 bytes) followed by 4 byte IP
	key := make([]byte, 4+4)

	binary.LittleEndian.PutUint32(key[0:4], uint32(prefixLen))
	copy(key[4:], n.IP)

	return key

A complete solution would also look at the type of process making the request and act accordingly. The daemon would also provide a way for the policies to be updated without restarting the daemon.

Teleport cybersecurity blog posts and tech news

Every other week we'll send a newsletter with the latest cybersecurity news and Teleport updates.

Teleport Restricted Session

Teleport, the open source access platform, is about to launch Restricted Sessions with Teleport 7.0. It uses the KRSI technology described in this article to implement network security policies applied to SSH sessions. To facilitate changes to the computing environment, Teleport exposes a gRPC API. With a single API call the updated network policies can be propagated to the whole fleet.

To learn more about Teleport and the newly released Restricted Sessions feature, please visit our docs.


Teleport Newsletter

Stay up-to-date with the newest Teleport releases by subscribing to our monthly updates.


Subscribe to our newsletter

PAM / Teleport