bcc VS ebpf-for-windows

But wait, there's more! Enter the BCC toolkit and library, your trusty sidekick in simplifying the arcane art of writing eBPF applications. With BCC by your side, you'll be wielding eBPF like a seasoned pro in no time.

Nice - I normally use [bash-readline](https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/tools/bashreadlin...) when coworking/co-inhabiting a server or training someone.

One of the big wins is not so much “build and run your own stuff” but there are very nice low-cost (in terms of compute) performance utilities built on eBPF

https://github.com/iovisor/bcc

There are so many utilities in that list; there’s a diagram midway down the readme which tries to help show their uses. bcc-tools should be available in any distro.

Also, Brendan Gregg does a ton of performance stuff that is worth knowing about if you check out his other work. Not eBPF only. Flame graphs are useful.

Reference: https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/libbpf-tools/memleak.c

In this article, we'll build a basic version of an HTTPS sniffer, inspired by bcc-sslsniff.py, but we'll use Rust and Aya. We're going to demonstrate the capabilities of uprobes by employing uprobe and uretprobe along with familiar maps like PerCpuArray, HashMap, and PerEventArray. This will be a straightforward example to help us explore how uprobes function.

As xpd program I am using the BCC example xdp_redirect_map.py in skb mode as my NIC does not support native mode, attaching the program to veth2 and a dummy function to veth3

https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/docs/reference_gu...

There already is an eBPF for Windows, it's even Microsoft's own project https://github.com/microsoft/ebpf-for-windows

This link is about a proposed new eBPF verifier for the Linux kernel that doesn't use signing. As a research project it is not integrated to the kernel, but their plan does not involve trusting user space (instead they suggest doing the heavy lifting of the verification in user space and provide a proof of safety that the kernel checks, which seems sensible to me).

I believe you meant to link https://github.com/microsoft/ebpf-for-windows/ instead (discussed on HN recently) which is an implementation by Microsoft using the above research project that indeed does not follow the suggestion from the authors of the research project to use validation and does require trusting user space.

Somewhat funnily, Microsoft also developed eBPF for Windows.

Not for long https://github.com/microsoft/ebpf-for-windows