Efficiently Logging Header Elements Using eBPF for Network Analysis

In the intricate tapestry of modern computing, where distributed systems, microservices, and cloud-native architectures reign supreme, the ability to peer deeply into network traffic is not merely a diagnostic tool—it is a fundamental necessity for maintaining performance, ensuring security, and facilitating robust application delivery. Traditional methods of network analysis, while foundational, often struggle to keep pace with the dynamic, high-volume, and increasingly encrypted nature of today's networks. Blind spots proliferate, overhead costs soar, and the sheer volume of data can quickly overwhelm conventional logging infrastructures.

Enter eBPF (extended Berkeley Packet Filter), a revolutionary technology that has emerged as a game-changer in the realm of kernel observability and network analysis. By allowing custom programs to run securely within the Linux kernel without altering kernel source code or loading new modules, eBPF provides an unparalleled vantage point into system events, particularly network operations. This article delves into the profound capabilities of eBPF for efficiently logging header elements, dissecting its mechanisms, exploring its architectural advantages, and illustrating how it empowers engineers to achieve unprecedented clarity in network analysis, even complementing the sophisticated operations of higher-level systems like an api gateway.

The Evolving Landscape of Network Analysis: Challenges and Limitations

Before we fully appreciate the power of eBPF, it's essential to understand the complexities and limitations inherent in traditional network analysis methodologies. For decades, tools like tcpdump, Wireshark, netstat, and custom kernel modules have formed the bedrock of network troubleshooting and monitoring. While invaluable, each carries its own set of trade-offs, particularly when confronted with the demands of modern data centers and cloud environments.

Traditional packet capture, exemplified by tcpdump, operates by setting network interfaces into promiscuous mode, capturing raw packets, and then writing them to disk or processing them in user space. This approach, while comprehensive, introduces significant overhead. Capturing every packet on a high-traffic interface can quickly consume CPU cycles, memory, and disk I/O, leading to performance degradation on the very systems being monitored. Furthermore, filtering packets effectively in user space means that a substantial amount of irrelevant data must first be copied from kernel space, crossing the kernel-user boundary—an expensive operation. This "copy tax" is a major bottleneck, limiting the scalability and efficiency of such tools. For large-scale deployments, managing and storing terabytes of raw packet data for forensic analysis becomes a logistical and financial nightmare. The sheer volume of data makes real-time analysis challenging, often relegating it to post-hoc investigation, which can delay incident response.

Another common approach involves custom kernel modules or patches. While these offer deep kernel access and high performance, they introduce significant risks. Modifying the kernel directly or loading unverified modules can destabilize the system, lead to kernel panics, or introduce security vulnerabilities. Maintenance becomes a monumental task, as every kernel upgrade potentially breaks existing modules, necessitating recompilation and rigorous testing. This lack of portability and the inherent fragility make custom kernel modules unsuitable for most production environments, especially those requiring rapid deployment and continuous integration. The complexity of kernel programming also raises the bar for developers, limiting the accessibility of such deep-level analysis.

System-level statistics gathered by tools like netstat provide aggregate views of network connections and interface activity. While useful for high-level monitoring, they lack the granularity required for detailed packet-level analysis or identifying specific anomalous behaviors. For instance, netstat can tell you about established TCP connections and their states, but it cannot easily reveal the specific header fields of packets within those connections, nor can it attribute latency to particular network segments or application layers without significant additional instrumentation.

The rise of containerization, microservices, and service meshes further complicates matters. Traffic between containers on the same host might not even traverse the physical network interface, making traditional capture tools less effective. Encrypted traffic, ubiquitous with TLS 1.3, means that the payload of packets is opaque to network monitoring tools without in-line decryption keys, shifting the focus towards analyzing header metadata and connection patterns. Furthermore, the dynamic nature of cloud environments, with ephemeral instances and auto-scaling groups, demands monitoring solutions that can adapt quickly without manual intervention or extensive configuration changes.

In this context, the need for a non-invasive, high-performance, and programmable mechanism to observe network events at their source—within the kernel—became acutely apparent. Such a mechanism would ideally minimize overhead, provide granular control, ensure system stability, and adapt to the ever-changing landscape of modern network architectures. This is precisely the void that eBPF aims to fill, offering a paradigm shift in how we approach network analysis and observability.

Understanding eBPF: A Kernel-Native Observability Revolution

eBPF stands as a powerful, versatile technology that extends the capabilities of the Linux kernel without requiring changes to its source code or the loading of potentially unstable kernel modules. At its core, eBPF allows developers to write small programs that are then loaded into the kernel, verified for safety, and executed in response to specific system events. This fundamentally transforms the kernel from a monolithic, static entity into a programmable, dynamic environment, offering an unparalleled vantage point for observing and manipulating system behavior.

The lineage of eBPF traces back to the original Berkeley Packet Filter (BPF) developed in the early 1990s. BPF was designed to provide an efficient way for user-space programs (like tcpdump) to filter packets directly in the kernel, avoiding unnecessary copies of irrelevant data. However, classic BPF was limited in scope, primarily focused on packet filtering with a rudimentary instruction set. The "e" in eBPF signifies "extended," indicating a massive expansion of its capabilities. Modern eBPF boasts a far richer instruction set, supports more complex data structures (like maps), and can attach to a multitude of kernel hooks beyond just network interfaces.

How eBPF Works: A Deep Dive into its Architecture

The operational workflow of an eBPF program involves several distinct stages:

1. Program Development: Developers write eBPF programs, typically in a restricted C-like language. These programs define the logic to be executed when a specific kernel event occurs. For instance, a program might inspect packet headers, count specific system calls, or monitor file system access patterns. Crucially, these programs interact with the kernel through a well-defined set of helper functions, which provide access to kernel data structures and services in a controlled manner.
2. Compilation: The C-like eBPF code is then compiled into eBPF bytecode using a specialized compiler, often LLVM/Clang. This bytecode is the machine-independent instruction set that the eBPF virtual machine (VM) within the kernel understands.
3. Loading into Kernel: The compiled eBPF bytecode is loaded into the kernel using the bpf() system call. During this process, a critical step called verification occurs.
4. Verification: The eBPF verifier is a sophisticated component of the kernel that rigorously analyzes the loaded eBPF program. Its primary role is to ensure the program's safety and prevent it from causing harm to the system. The verifier checks for several crucial properties:
   • Termination: Guarantees that the program will always terminate and not enter infinite loops. This is achieved by checking for back-edges in the control flow graph and limiting loop iterations.
   • Memory Safety: Ensures that the program does not access invalid memory addresses, such as out-of-bounds array access or dereferencing null pointers. It meticulously tracks the state of all registers and stack variables.
   • Resource Limits: Enforces limits on the program's complexity and resource consumption, such as maximum instruction count and stack size.
   • Helper Function Usage: Confirms that the program only calls allowed helper functions and that their arguments are valid.
   • Privilege Escalation: Prevents any attempts to gain unauthorized kernel privileges. The verifier's strictness is a cornerstone of eBPF's security model, allowing unprivileged users to load certain types of eBPF programs (though network-related programs typically require CAP_BPF or CAP_NET_ADMIN capabilities).
5. Attachment to Hooks: Once verified, the eBPF program is attached to a specific "hook" within the kernel. These hooks are predefined points in the kernel's execution flow where eBPF programs can be triggered. Examples include:
   • Network Stack Hooks: XDP (eXpress Data Path) for very early packet processing, TC (Traffic Control) ingress/egress hooks, socket filters, kprobes on network functions.
   • System Call Hooks: sys_enter and sys_exit kprobes.
   • Function Hooks: kprobes and uprobes (for kernel and user-space functions, respectively).
   • Tracepoints: Stable points in the kernel specifically designed for tracing.
   • Security Hooks: LSM (Linux Security Modules) integration.
6. Execution: When the event associated with the hook occurs, the attached eBPF program is executed directly within the kernel. Its bytecode is often Just-In-Time (JIT) compiled into native machine code for maximum performance, essentially running at near-native speed.
7. Data Interaction (Maps and Perf Buffs): eBPF programs communicate with user-space applications primarily through two mechanisms:
   • eBPF Maps: These are versatile key-value data structures residing in kernel space. eBPF programs can read from and write to maps, while user-space applications can also access them via the bpf() system call. Maps are crucial for accumulating statistics, sharing configuration data, or maintaining state across multiple eBPF events. Common map types include hash maps, array maps, and ring buffers.
   • Perf Buffs (Perf Event Ring Buffers): For streaming events from the kernel to user space, perf_event_mmap ring buffers are used. eBPF programs can write structured data (e.g., event logs, packet summaries) to these buffers, which user-space applications can then read asynchronously and process. This mechanism is highly efficient for high-volume event reporting.

Key Advantages of eBPF for Network Analysis

The architectural design of eBPF bestows upon it several significant advantages for network analysis:

• Performance: By executing directly in the kernel and often JIT-compiled, eBPF programs operate with extremely low overhead. They can filter, inspect, and even modify packets at critical points in the network stack, such as XDP (eXpress Data Path) which operates even before the full network stack processing, allowing for significant performance gains and preventing unwanted traffic from reaching higher layers. This in-kernel processing minimizes the "copy tax" associated with moving data between kernel and user space.
• Safety and Stability: The eBPF verifier is paramount. It guarantees that eBPF programs cannot crash the kernel, loop indefinitely, or access unauthorized memory. This makes eBPF a secure and stable mechanism for extending kernel functionality, a stark contrast to custom kernel modules.
• Flexibility and Programmability: eBPF offers unparalleled programmability. Engineers can write highly customized logic to inspect specific packet fields, correlate events, aggregate statistics, or even enforce custom network policies. This flexibility allows for tailoring solutions to precise operational needs, far beyond what static tools can offer.
• Non-Invasiveness: eBPF programs attach to existing kernel hooks without requiring kernel recompilation or modifications. This means they can be deployed and updated dynamically without system reboots, ensuring continuous operation and easier integration into existing infrastructure.
• Rich Context: eBPF programs have access to a wealth of kernel context. For network analysis, this means not only packet data but also process IDs, thread IDs, CPU information, system call arguments, and even user-space application context via uprobes. This rich contextual information is invaluable for holistic observability.
• Observability from First Principles: eBPF allows observation directly at the source of events, whether it's a network interface, a system call, or a scheduler event. This eliminates the blind spots often encountered with higher-level monitoring tools, providing a single source of truth for understanding system behavior.

In essence, eBPF provides a secure, efficient, and flexible way to instrument the Linux kernel, unlocking unprecedented visibility and control over network operations. This foundational capability is what makes it so powerful for logging header elements and revolutionizing how we perform network analysis.

eBPF for Deep Network Packet Analysis: Beyond the Surface

The true power of eBPF for network analysis lies in its ability to deeply inspect and interact with network packets at various stages of their journey through the kernel network stack. Unlike traditional tools that passively capture or aggregate statistics, eBPF empowers active, programmatic analysis right where the action happens, minimizing latency and maximizing detail.

Strategic Attachment Points in the Network Stack

eBPF programs can be strategically attached to several critical hooks within the Linux kernel's network stack, each offering unique advantages for packet processing and logging:

1. XDP (eXpress Data Path): This is the earliest possible point in the kernel network stack where an eBPF program can execute after a packet arrives at the network interface. XDP programs run directly on the network driver's receive queue, often before the packet is even allocated a full sk_buff (socket buffer) structure. This extremely early execution allows for ultra-high-performance packet processing, including:
   • Packet Filtering: Dropping unwanted traffic (e.g., DDoS mitigation, invalid packets) at line rate, preventing it from consuming further kernel resources.
   • Load Balancing: Directing incoming packets to specific CPU cores or application instances based on header information.
   • Traffic Steering: Forwarding packets to different network interfaces or virtual functions.
   • Custom Packet Processing: Inspecting and modifying headers, extracting metadata, or even generating new packets. For logging header elements, XDP is ideal for high-volume scenarios where only a subset of packet information (e.g., L2/L3/L4 headers) is needed, and efficiency is paramount. It can log source/destination MACs, IPs, ports, and even early TCP flags before the packet enters the more complex stages of the kernel.
2. TC (Traffic Control) Ingress/Egress: eBPF programs can also be attached to the Traffic Control subsystem, which allows for more sophisticated packet manipulation, classification, and scheduling. TC hooks offer a point of execution later than XDP but earlier than socket filters, providing access to more resolved packet information and the full sk_buff structure.
   • Ingress Hook: Processes packets as they enter the network stack from an interface. Useful for applying policies, classifying traffic, and logging header elements after initial sanity checks but before full protocol processing.
   • Egress Hook: Processes packets just before they are sent out from an interface. Ideal for observing outgoing traffic patterns, enforcing egress policies, and logging outgoing header information. TC hooks are valuable when the logic requires interacting with the TC queuing discipline or when more context than XDP provides is necessary but still prior to application-level processing.
3. Socket Filters (SO_ATTACH_BPF): These eBPF programs are attached to individual sockets. They filter packets destined for that specific socket, allowing applications to receive only relevant data. This is particularly useful for application-specific monitoring, where a particular service only cares about its own traffic and wants to avoid the overhead of processing unrelated packets. While less about global network analysis, it's crucial for understanding individual application traffic.
4. kprobes and tracepoints on Network Functions: Beyond explicit network hooks, eBPF can also attach kprobes (dynamic instrumentation points) to various kernel functions within the network stack (e.g., ip_rcv, tcp_rcv_established, __skb_free). tracepoints (static, stable instrumentation points) are also present for common network events. These offer surgical precision, allowing analysis of very specific events or data structures at particular stages of network processing, such as TCP state changes, queue overflows, or specific protocol dissections. While more granular, they require intimate knowledge of kernel internals.

Extracting and Logging Header Elements

The core task of logging header elements involves writing eBPF programs that can correctly parse and extract relevant fields from incoming or outgoing packets. Given a pointer to the packet data (or sk_buff structure), an eBPF program can safely navigate through the various protocol headers.

For example, an XDP program might: 1. Obtain a pointer to the start of the packet data. 2. Verify the packet length to prevent out-of-bounds access. 3. Parse the Ethernet header to extract source/destination MAC addresses and the EtherType. 4. If EtherType indicates IPv4, parse the IP header to get source/destination IP addresses, TTL, and protocol (TCP/UDP/ICMP). 5. If the protocol is TCP or UDP, parse the respective header for source/destination ports and other relevant flags (e.g., SYN, ACK, FIN for TCP). 6. For HTTP traffic, the eBPF program would need to inspect the payload after TCP/UDP headers. This is more complex, especially with variable-length HTTP headers and potential TLS encryption. However, for unencrypted HTTP, an eBPF program can identify the start of the HTTP request line (e.g., "GET / HTTP/1.1") and extract key headers like Host, User-Agent, or Content-Length by pattern matching or simple parsing, up to a certain depth. 7. Once the desired header elements are extracted, the eBPF program typically stores this data in an eBPF map (for aggregation) or pushes it to a perf_event_mmap ring buffer (for streaming to user space).

This in-kernel processing drastically reduces the amount of data that needs to be copied to user space. Instead of copying entire packets, only the specifically extracted header fields are sent, leading to significant efficiency gains, especially in high-throughput environments.

For scenarios involving encrypted traffic (HTTPS), direct inspection of HTTP headers within the eBPF program is not feasible without decryption. In such cases, eBPF can still provide valuable insights by logging TLS handshake details (e.g., SNI - Server Name Indication), connection patterns, latency, and byte counts, offering a high-level view even when the payload remains opaque. This highlights a limitation but also demonstrates the adaptability of eBPF—it provides what it can from the kernel's perspective.

Benefits for Network Troubleshooting and Security

By providing this deep, efficient, and flexible access to header elements, eBPF revolutionizes several aspects of network operations:

• Precise Troubleshooting: Engineers can pinpoint the exact packet that caused an issue, observe specific flag combinations, identify malformed headers, or track the path of a single flow, greatly accelerating root cause analysis. For instance, if an api gateway is experiencing dropped connections, an eBPF program can log TCP RST packets and their preceding activity to identify if the drops are network-initiated or application-initiated.
• Real-time Anomaly Detection: By continuously monitoring header elements and connection metadata, eBPF programs can detect suspicious patterns indicative of DDoS attacks, port scans, unauthorized access attempts, or unusual protocol behavior, often with millisecond latency.
• Performance Bottleneck Identification: Logging header elements alongside timestamps allows for precise calculation of latency across different network segments or between different layers of the network stack, identifying where bottlenecks occur. For example, measuring time between XDP ingress and socket reception.
• Security Policy Enforcement: XDP programs can act as ultra-fast firewalls, dropping packets based on arbitrary header criteria before they even consume significant system resources, providing an additional layer of defense.
• Protocol Analysis: Develop custom eBPF programs to parse non-standard or proprietary protocol headers for specialized network analysis.

In essence, eBPF moves network analysis from a reactive, often user-space bound activity, to a proactive, kernel-native capability, offering unprecedented detail and efficiency. This foundational visibility is crucial for understanding the behavior of all network services, from raw packet flows to the complex interactions facilitated by an api gateway or api calls in a microservices architecture.

Architecting an eBPF-based Header Logging Solution

Designing an effective eBPF-based solution for logging header elements requires careful consideration of several architectural components, trade-offs between detail and performance, and strategies for data aggregation and user-space communication. The goal is to maximize observability while minimizing the impact on the monitored system.

Core Components of an eBPF Logging System

An eBPF-based header logging solution typically comprises three main components:

1. eBPF Programs (Kernel Space): These are the core logic engines. Written in a C-like language and compiled to bytecode, they are responsible for:
   • Packet Inspection: Attaching to network hooks (XDP, TC, kprobes) to intercept packets.
   • Header Parsing: Safely navigating packet buffers to extract desired L2, L3, L4, and sometimes L7 (for unencrypted traffic) header fields. This involves understanding byte offsets, protocol field lengths, and network byte order.
   • Event Generation: Packaging the extracted header data into a structured format (e.g., a struct in C).
   • Data Emission: Writing the structured event data to an eBPF map for aggregation or to a perf_event_mmap ring buffer for streaming to user space.
2. User-Space Agent/Collector (User Space): This component runs as a daemon or application in user space. Its responsibilities include:
   • eBPF Program Loading: Using the bpf() system call to load, verify, and attach eBPF programs to kernel hooks.
   • Map Interaction: Reading aggregated statistics from eBPF maps (e.g., periodic polling) or updating map entries (e.g., configuration changes for eBPF programs).
   • Perf Buff Monitoring: Continuously reading event data from perf_event_mmap ring buffers. This is typically done in a non-blocking loop, consuming events as they are generated by the kernel.
   • Data Processing: Further processing the raw event data received from the kernel. This might involve enriching events with additional metadata (e.g., process names, container IDs), filtering, or aggregating.
   • Data Export: Sending the processed logs to a backend storage system, logging platform (e.g., Elasticsearch, Splunk), time-series database (e.g., Prometheus, InfluxDB), or a visualization dashboard.
3. Data Storage and Analysis Backend: This is the external system responsible for persistent storage, indexing, querying, and visualization of the collected header logs. Common choices include:
   • Log Management Platforms: ELK Stack (Elasticsearch, Logstash, Kibana), Splunk, Loki.
   • Time-Series Databases: Prometheus (with Grafana), InfluxDB.
   • Custom Data Lakes: Cloud storage (S3, GCS) combined with analytical tools.

Designing eBPF Maps for Efficient Data Aggregation

eBPF maps are crucial for efficiently aggregating statistics in kernel space, reducing the volume of data that needs to be transferred to user space. Instead of sending every single packet's header details, the eBPF program can increment counters or update summary statistics in a map.

Example Map Usage for Flow Statistics: Consider logging basic flow information: source IP, destination IP, source port, destination port, protocol. An eBPF program could use a hash map where the key is a struct containing these 5-tuple elements, and the value is another struct containing counters (e.g., packet_count, byte_count, last_seen_timestamp).

// Key for the map
struct flow_key {
    __u32 saddr;
    __u32 daddr;
    __u16 sport;
    __u16 dport;
    __u8 proto;
};

// Value for the map
struct flow_stats {
    __u64 packet_count;
    __u64 byte_count;
    __u64 last_seen_ns; // Nanoseconds timestamp
};

// eBPF Map definition (in the BPF program)
struct {
    __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH);
    __uint(key_size, sizeof(struct flow_key));
    __uint(value_size, sizeof(struct flow_stats));
    __uint(max_entries, 10240); // Max number of concurrent flows
} flow_stats_map SEC(".maps");

// Inside eBPF program, after parsing headers:
struct flow_key key = {...}; // Populate with parsed data
struct flow_stats *stats = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&flow_stats_map, &key);

if (stats) {
    stats->packet_count++;
    stats->byte_count += packet_length;
    stats->last_seen_ns = bpf_ktime_get_ns();
} else {
    struct flow_stats new_stats = {
        .packet_count = 1,
        .byte_count = packet_length,
        .last_seen_ns = bpf_ktime_get_ns(),
    };
    bpf_map_update_elem(&flow_stats_map, &key, &new_stats, BPF_NOEXIST);
}

The user-space agent would then periodically read and clear this flow_stats_map to collect aggregated statistics, significantly reducing the data volume compared to logging every single packet.

Streaming Event Data with Perf Buffers

For real-time event logging, where individual occurrences are critical (e.g., new connection attempts, specific error packets, or anomalous flags), perf_event_mmap ring buffers are the preferred mechanism. The eBPF program directly writes a serialized struct containing the event details to the buffer, and the user-space agent asynchronously reads from it.

// Event structure to send to user space
struct network_event {
    __u64 timestamp_ns;
    __u32 saddr;
    __u32 daddr;
    __u16 sport;
    __u16 dport;
    __u8 proto;
    __u8 tcp_flags;
    __u33 packet_length;
    // ... other relevant header fields
};

// eBPF Perf Buffer Map definition
struct {
    __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY);
    __uint(key_size, sizeof(__u32));
    __uint(value_size, sizeof(__u32));
} events_map SEC(".maps");

// Inside eBPF program, after parsing headers:
struct network_event event = {...}; // Populate with parsed data
event.timestamp_ns = bpf_ktime_get_ns();
event.packet_length = len; // Packet length

bpf_perf_event_output(ctx, &events_map, BPF_F_CURRENT_CPU, &event, sizeof(event));

This approach provides a low-latency, high-throughput channel for kernel-to-user-space communication, ideal for detailed event logging.

Considerations for Different Protocols

Logging header elements varies based on the network protocol:

• Ethernet (L2): Relatively straightforward to parse source/destination MAC addresses and EtherType from the start of the packet.
• IP (L3): Parse source/destination IP, TTL, protocol, and IP flags. Handle IPv4 and IPv6 differences.
• TCP/UDP (L4): Extract source/destination ports, TCP flags (SYN, ACK, FIN, RST, PSH, URG, ECE, CWR), sequence numbers, acknowledgement numbers, window size. UDP is simpler.
• ICMP/ICMPv6: Extract type and code for diagnostics.
• HTTP (L7): This is where it gets complex. For unencrypted HTTP, an eBPF program can attempt to parse the request/response line and specific headers (e.g., Host, User-Agent, Content-Type, Content-Length, Cookie). This often involves string matching and bounds checking. The challenge is the variable length of headers and the need to avoid unbounded loops in eBPF. For HTTPS, only TLS handshake details are visible at the network level unless kernel-level TLS key logging is enabled (e.g., via SSLKEYLOGFILE if supported by the application), which is generally not recommended for production security.

Practical Implementation Nuances

• Bounded Loops and Recursion: eBPF verifier heavily restricts loops and prohibits recursion to guarantee termination. Complex parsing logic must be carefully crafted to fit within these constraints, often relying on fixed-size buffers and bounded iterations.
• Helper Functions: Utilize eBPF helper functions extensively for tasks like getting current time (bpf_ktime_get_ns), accessing map elements (bpf_map_lookup_elem, bpf_map_update_elem), and sending perf events (bpf_perf_event_output).
• Context Pointers: Understand the context pointer (ctx) passed to the eBPF program, which varies based on the hook type (e.g., xdp_md for XDP, sk_buff for TC).
• Error Handling: Include robust bounds checking and null pointer checks to satisfy the verifier and ensure program safety.
• Resource Management: Be mindful of map sizes and event buffer capacities. Overflowing maps or perf buffers can lead to dropped data or performance issues.
• Version Compatibility: eBPF features evolve with kernel versions. Ensure compatibility with target kernel versions.

By meticulously architecting these components and adhering to eBPF's safety guidelines, developers can construct highly efficient and detailed header logging solutions that unlock unprecedented visibility into network traffic, feeding critical insights into downstream analysis systems.

APIPark is a high-performance AI gateway that allows you to securely access the most comprehensive LLM APIs globally on the APIPark platform, including OpenAI, Anthropic, Mistral, Llama2, Google Gemini, and more.Try APIPark now! 👇👇👇

Practical Use Cases and Real-World Applications

The granular visibility and efficiency provided by eBPF for logging header elements translate into a myriad of practical use cases across various domains of network management, security, and application performance monitoring.

1. Network Performance Monitoring (NPM)

eBPF can revolutionize how network performance is measured and analyzed. By logging header elements and associating them with high-precision timestamps, engineers can:

• Measure Micro-Latency: Track packet traversal times across specific points in the network stack or between network devices with nanosecond precision. For example, measure the time between a packet hitting the NIC (XDP hook) and being delivered to an application socket.
• Identify Congestion: Monitor TCP window sizes, retransmissions, and packet drops at the kernel level. An increase in retransmissions or a decrease in advertised window size, logged via eBPF, can be direct indicators of network congestion.
• Analyze Flow Characteristics: Aggregate statistics on byte counts, packet counts, and flow durations for specific 5-tuples (source/destination IP, port, protocol). This helps identify "elephant flows" consuming disproportionate bandwidth or "mice flows" that are numerous but small.
• Validate Load Balancing: If an api gateway or load balancer is in place, eBPF can verify that traffic is being distributed evenly across backend services by monitoring destination IPs/ports after the load balancer, providing empirical evidence of its effectiveness.

2. Security Analytics and Threat Detection

eBPF offers a powerful new frontier for real-time security monitoring and threat detection by providing deep insights into network behavior that traditional tools often miss.

• DDoS Mitigation: XDP-based eBPF programs can identify and drop malicious packets (e.g., SYN floods, UDP amplification attacks) at the earliest possible point, effectively mitigating attacks before they impact the network stack or applications. By logging the source IPs and connection attempts, patterns of attack can be quickly identified.
• Unauthorized Access Detection: Monitor connection attempts to sensitive ports or from unusual source IPs. E.g., logging header elements for SSH attempts from non-corporate networks can trigger alerts.
• Port Scanning Detection: Detect sequential or rapid connection attempts to multiple ports on a host from a single source IP, a classic indicator of a port scan.
• Protocol Anomaly Detection: Identify packets with malformed headers, unusual flag combinations (e.g., SYN-FIN packets), or non-standard protocol behavior that could indicate exploit attempts.
• Network Policy Enforcement: Create dynamic, kernel-level firewalls that enforce fine-grained network policies based on header elements, even for ephemeral containers or microservices. For instance, only allowing specific api calls from authorized internal services.

3. Troubleshooting Network Issues

When network problems strike, eBPF can provide the critical data needed for rapid diagnosis, often eliminating the guesswork associated with traditional methods.

• Packet Drop Analysis: Identify precisely where packets are being dropped in the kernel network stack (e.g., due to full queues, routing issues, or firewall rules) by attaching eBPF programs to various internal kernel functions.
• Connection Lifecycle Tracing: Trace the full lifecycle of a TCP connection from SYN to FIN/RST, logging all relevant header flags and sequence numbers to diagnose issues like hung connections, unexpected resets, or half-open connections impacting an api.
• MTU/Fragmentation Issues: Log IP fragmentation events or path MTU discovery failures by inspecting IP header flags and lengths.
• Routing Issues: Verify that packets are taking the expected route by logging the ingress/egress interface and destination IP, cross-referencing with routing tables.

4. Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Microservices Observability

While eBPF operates at a lower level than typical APM tools, its network insights are invaluable for understanding application performance, especially in distributed microservices environments.

• Service Mesh Visibility: For applications communicating over a service mesh, eBPF can provide visibility into the underlying network calls between sidecars, including latency and specific HTTP header details (for unencrypted internal traffic), complementing the service mesh's own metrics.
• Connecting Network Latency to Application Response: Correlate network events (like connection setup time, packet retransmissions) logged by eBPF with application-level metrics to understand how network conditions impact application response times.
• Resource Utilization of Network-Bound Services: Identify which services are generating the most network traffic, which might indicate inefficient communication patterns or large data transfers, especially relevant for services behind an api gateway.

5. Integration with Higher-Level Systems and API Management

The granular network data collected by eBPF provides a foundational layer of observability that can significantly enhance higher-level network management and API management platforms. While eBPF offers unparalleled kernel-level visibility, managing the entire lifecycle of APIs, from development to deployment and monitoring, often requires specialized platforms that operate at a different abstraction layer.

This is where comprehensive API management solutions come into play. An api gateway, for instance, is a critical component in modern microservices architectures, acting as a single entry point for api requests, handling routing, authentication, rate limiting, and analytics. While the gateway itself generates valuable logs about api calls, eBPF can offer a deeper understanding of the underlying network health and performance that impacts the gateway's operation. For example, eBPF can log: * Network latency and packet drops before traffic even reaches the api gateway. * The health of TCP connections between the gateway and its backend services. * Unusual network patterns that might indicate an attack targeting the network fabric around the gateway.

Products like APIPark, an open-source AI gateway and API management platform, exemplify how higher-level insights are delivered. APIPark provides end-to-end API lifecycle management, quick integration of AI models, unified API formats, and crucially, "Detailed API Call Logging" and "Powerful Data Analysis." Such platforms focus on the business logic and performance of the APIs themselves: who is calling them, what the response times are, and what the overall usage patterns look like. The granular network data from eBPF can act as a crucial diagnostic layer for APIPark and similar platforms. If API response times spike in APIPark's dashboards, eBPF logs can help determine if the root cause is network congestion, TCP connection issues, or other kernel-level anomalies that wouldn't be visible from the API transaction logs alone. This complementary relationship ensures a holistic view, from the raw packets traversing the kernel to the structured api calls managed by a sophisticated gateway solution.

By combining the low-level, high-fidelity network insights from eBPF with the application-aware logging and management capabilities of platforms like APIPark, organizations gain a truly comprehensive observability stack. This synergy empowers developers, operations personnel, and business managers to maintain robust, secure, and high-performing network and application ecosystems.

Performance and Scalability Considerations for eBPF Logging

While eBPF offers significant performance advantages, deploying an eBPF-based header logging solution at scale requires careful consideration of its potential overhead, strategies for optimization, and the overall system architecture to ensure both efficiency and comprehensiveness. Even though eBPF programs run in kernel space, they still consume CPU cycles and memory, and the act of emitting data to user space can become a bottleneck if not managed properly.

Minimal Overhead in Kernel Space

One of eBPF's most lauded features is its low overhead. By executing JIT-compiled code directly in the kernel, eBPF programs can process packets and events with minimal latency. For instance, XDP programs operate at line rate, often before the full network stack has processed the packet, which dramatically reduces the computational burden for unwanted traffic. This in-kernel filtering and processing avoid the costly context switches and data copying associated with traditional user-space packet capture tools.

However, "minimal" doesn't mean "zero." The complexity of the eBPF program directly correlates with its CPU consumption. A program that merely counts packets will have lower overhead than one that deeply parses HTTP headers, performs complex string matching, and writes large event structures to a perf buffer. Developers must strike a balance between the desired level of detail and the acceptable performance impact. The eBPF verifier also enforces limits on instruction count, ensuring programs cannot run indefinitely or consume excessive resources, but efficient algorithm design remains crucial.

Optimizing Data Transfer to User Space

The primary source of overhead in an eBPF logging system often lies in the communication channel between the kernel-resident eBPF programs and the user-space agent. Copying data from kernel space to user space is inherently expensive. Strategies to optimize this transfer include:

1. Aggregation in Kernel Space (eBPF Maps): As discussed, using eBPF maps to aggregate statistics (e.g., flow counts, byte counts, latency summaries) directly in the kernel before transferring them to user space is highly effective. Instead of sending an event for every single packet, the user-space agent only periodically fetches summarized data. This significantly reduces the volume of data copied.
2. Efficient Use of Perf Buffers: When individual events are required, perf_event_mmap ring buffers are the most efficient mechanism for kernel-to-user-space streaming.
   • Batching: User-space agents should read from perf buffers in batches, processing multiple events at once rather than one by one.
   • Data Structure Design: Design the event struct to be as compact as possible, only including absolutely necessary fields. Avoid sending redundant data.
   • Consumer Efficiency: Ensure the user-space agent is efficient in processing the received events. If the consumer cannot keep up with the rate of events from the kernel, the perf buffer can overflow, leading to dropped events and data loss. This is a common bottleneck in high-throughput environments.
3. Filtering at the Source: Leverage eBPF's in-kernel filtering capabilities to only emit events for traffic that is truly relevant. For example, if only HTTP traffic on port 80 and 443 is of interest, the eBPF program should filter out all other protocols and ports immediately.
4. Rate Limiting: In extreme high-volume scenarios, the eBPF program itself might implement a form of rate limiting, only emitting an event for every Nth packet or after a certain time interval, to prevent overwhelming the user-space agent or the backend logging system. This sacrifices some granularity but ensures system stability.

Scalability in Large Environments

Deploying eBPF logging across a large fleet of servers or in a high-density cloud environment introduces additional scalability challenges:

• Distributed Collection: A centralized user-space agent might not be able to handle the aggregate event stream from hundreds or thousands of servers. A distributed collection architecture, where each server has its own local agent that aggregates and forwards data to a central backend, is typically required.
• Backend Scaling: The chosen data storage and analysis backend (e.g., Elasticsearch, Prometheus) must be able to ingest, index, and query the potentially massive volume of eBPF-generated logs and metrics. This often necessitates sharded databases, distributed storage, and robust indexing strategies.
• Resource Allocation: Monitor CPU, memory, and network utilization of both the eBPF programs (indirectly via kernel metrics) and the user-space agents. Adjust resource allocations as needed to prevent performance degradation on the monitored hosts.
• Dynamic Deployment and Management: In cloud-native and Kubernetes environments, eBPF agents need to be deployed and managed dynamically. Tools like kube-OVN or Cilium leverage eBPF extensively for networking and observability, demonstrating how eBPF can be integrated into orchestrators for scalable management.
• Context Enrichment: While eBPF provides raw kernel context, enriching logs with higher-level metadata (e.g., Kubernetes pod names, service labels, application versions) in the user-space agent or backend is crucial for making the data actionable in large, complex environments. This additional context bridges the gap between low-level network events and high-level application behavior, providing a comprehensive understanding of the system, whether it involves a simple api call or a complex interaction through an api gateway.

Benchmarking and Iteration

Performance tuning an eBPF-based logging system is an iterative process. It's crucial to:

• Benchmark: Conduct thorough performance benchmarks under realistic traffic loads to understand the overhead introduced by the eBPF programs and user-space agents.
• Profile: Use profiling tools (perf, BCC's profile tools) to identify CPU hotspots in both kernel and user space.
• Optimize: Refine eBPF program logic, map usage, event structures, and user-space agent processing based on profiling results.

By carefully planning the architecture, optimizing data paths, and continuously monitoring performance, eBPF-based header logging can provide unparalleled network visibility at scale without compromising the performance or stability of production systems.

Security Implications and Best Practices

eBPF's ability to run custom code in the kernel raises natural questions about security. While its design inherently prioritizes safety, understanding both its security benefits and potential risks is crucial for responsible deployment.

eBPF as a Security Enabler

eBPF significantly enhances security posture in several ways:

• Advanced Threat Detection: By providing granular, real-time visibility into kernel events, eBPF enables the detection of sophisticated threats that traditional security tools might miss. This includes:
  • Rootkit Detection: Monitoring low-level system calls or file access patterns for anomalous behavior indicative of a rootkit attempting to hide processes or files.
  • Lateral Movement: Tracing network connections and process execution across hosts to identify unauthorized lateral movement within a network.
  • Zero-Day Exploits: Observing unusual system call sequences or network packet patterns that could be indicative of previously unknown vulnerabilities being exploited.
• DDoS Mitigation: As discussed, XDP-based eBPF programs can act as ultra-fast, in-kernel firewalls, dropping malicious traffic at line rate before it consumes significant system resources, providing robust protection against various DDoS attack vectors.
• Network Policy Enforcement: eBPF allows for the implementation of highly dynamic and fine-grained network policies at the kernel level, enforcing least-privilege access between microservices or containers. This can complement or even enhance traditional firewall rules.
• Runtime Security: eBPF can monitor process execution, file integrity, and memory access in real time, detecting and potentially preventing malicious activities such as unauthorized code injection or data exfiltration.

Potential Risks and Mitigation Strategies

Despite its inherent safety mechanisms, eBPF is a powerful tool, and like any powerful tool, it must be used responsibly.

1. Malicious eBPF Programs: While the eBPF verifier is robust, no system is perfectly infallible. A sophisticated attacker who manages to bypass the verifier (perhaps through a kernel vulnerability) could load a malicious eBPF program. Such a program could, in theory, exfiltrate sensitive data, disrupt network traffic, or perform other malicious actions.
   • Mitigation:
     • Kernel Updates: Keep the Linux kernel up-to-date to patch any potential vulnerabilities in the eBPF verifier or runtime.
     • Least Privilege: Restrict who can load eBPF programs. Typically, loading eBPF programs requires CAP_BPF or CAP_NET_ADMIN capabilities. In containerized environments, these capabilities should be granted only to trusted, specialized security or observability agents, not to general application containers.
     • Auditing: Audit eBPF program loading and attachment events.
2. Information Leakage/Data Privacy: eBPF programs have deep access to kernel data structures and network packets. If improperly designed, an eBPF program could inadvertently expose sensitive information, such as:
   • Unencrypted HTTP Headers: Logging sensitive headers like Authorization tokens, Cookie values, or personally identifiable information (PII) from unencrypted HTTP traffic.
   • Kernel Memory Contents: An improperly coded eBPF program, even if verified, might accidentally leak parts of kernel memory if it miscalculates offsets or data lengths when writing to user space.
   • Traffic Metadata: Even with encrypted traffic, the metadata (source/destination IP, port, connection times, packet sizes) can reveal significant information about who is communicating with whom and when.
   • Mitigation:
     • Careful Program Design: Design eBPF programs to extract and log only the absolutely necessary information. Avoid capturing raw payloads or sensitive header values unless strictly required and handled with appropriate security controls.
     • Data Masking/Redaction: Implement data masking or redaction in the user-space agent for any sensitive information before it is stored in the backend logging system.
     • Access Control: Apply strict access controls to the collected eBPF logs and metrics.
     • Compliance: Ensure compliance with data privacy regulations (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA) when collecting and storing network data.
3. Denial of Service (DoS): An eBPF program, even if not malicious, could inadvertently cause a DoS by:
   • Excessive Resource Consumption: If an eBPF program is too complex or inefficient, it could consume excessive CPU cycles, impacting system performance.
   • Overwhelming User Space: Emitting an excessively high volume of events to the perf buffer could overwhelm the user-space agent or the backend logging system, leading to dropped data and a DoS for the monitoring infrastructure itself.
   • Mitigation:
     • Performance Testing: Thoroughly test eBPF programs under high load to measure their impact.
     • Rate Limiting/Aggregation: Implement in-kernel aggregation (maps) and rate limiting (conditional event emission) to control the data volume.
     • Robust User-Space Agent: Design the user-space agent to be resilient to high event rates, with proper buffering and error handling.
4. Complexity and Debugging: The inherent complexity of kernel-level programming and the restricted eBPF environment can make debugging challenging. An incorrectly written eBPF program, even if it passes verification, might produce incorrect results or subtly impact system behavior.
   • Mitigation:
     • Rigorous Testing: Test eBPF programs extensively in non-production environments.
     • Incremental Development: Build and test eBPF programs incrementally, adding complexity step-by-step.
     • Debugging Tools: Utilize specialized eBPF debugging tools (e.g., bpftool, BCC's trace functions, perf) to understand program behavior and inspect map contents.

In conclusion, eBPF is a powerful asset for network analysis and security, but its deployment requires a thoughtful approach to risk management. By adhering to best practices in program design, privilege management, data handling, and continuous monitoring, organizations can harness the immense power of eBPF to enhance their security posture without introducing undue risk to their critical systems.

The Future of Network Analysis with eBPF and Beyond

The journey through the capabilities of eBPF for efficiently logging header elements underscores a pivotal shift in how we perceive and interact with the Linux kernel and, by extension, network observability. eBPF is not just another tool; it is a fundamental architectural change that empowers developers and operators with unprecedented visibility and control, transforming the kernel into a programmable data plane. The implications for network analysis are profound, promising a future of more intelligent, proactive, and precise network management.

Emerging Trends and Directions

1. Deeper Protocol Visibility: While challenging, the community is actively exploring more advanced, verifier-friendly ways to parse application-layer protocols (like HTTP/2, gRPC, even Kafka) within eBPF. This would provide richer context directly at the kernel level, bridging the gap between raw packets and application-specific events.
2. AI/ML Integration: The wealth of high-fidelity, real-time data generated by eBPF programs (especially detailed header logs and flow statistics) forms an ideal input for AI and machine learning models. These models can be trained to detect subtle anomalies, predict performance degradation, or identify novel attack patterns far more effectively than rule-based systems. Imagine ML models trained on eBPF flow data automatically detecting zero-day network attacks or predicting application slowdowns before they become critical.
3. Declarative eBPF: Abstraction layers built on top of raw eBPF are making it more accessible. Projects like Cilium and its Hubble observability platform allow users to define network policies and observability requirements declaratively, without writing eBPF code directly. This trend will continue, democratizing the power of eBPF for a wider audience.
4. Hardware Offloading: The performance benefits of eBPF are so significant that network interface cards (NICs) are increasingly supporting hardware offloading of XDP programs. This allows packet processing to happen even earlier, directly on the NIC's data path, before packets even reach the host CPU, pushing efficiency to new frontiers.
5. Cross-Kernel and Cross-OS Adoption: While deeply integrated with Linux, the conceptual power of eBPF has inspired similar initiatives in other operating systems. The core ideas of safe, in-kernel programmability are gaining traction, hinting at a future where such capabilities are more ubiquitous.
6. Full-Stack Observability: eBPF's reach extends beyond networking into CPU scheduling, file I/O, memory management, and system calls. This enables truly full-stack observability, allowing engineers to correlate network events with application behavior, system resource usage, and process execution, providing a holistic view of system health and performance.

Conclusion

Efficiently logging header elements using eBPF for network analysis is not just a technical enhancement; it's a paradigm shift. It moves network observability from a realm of often-limited, resource-intensive, and reactive tools to a proactive, high-fidelity, and kernel-native capability. By providing unprecedented visibility into network traffic at its source, eBPF empowers organizations to:

• Boost Performance: Optimize network paths, identify bottlenecks, and accelerate troubleshooting.
• Fortify Security: Detect and mitigate advanced threats, enforce granular network policies, and gain real-time forensic capabilities.
• Enhance Operational Efficiency: Reduce mean time to resolution (MTTR) for network and application issues, automate anomaly detection, and provide richer data for capacity planning.
• Complement Higher-Level Systems: Provide foundational network insights that enrich and validate the data collected by specialized platforms such as an api gateway or api management solutions like APIPark. By understanding the underlying network fabric, the performance and reliability of critical api services can be guaranteed, fostering a resilient and high-performing digital ecosystem.

The evolution of eBPF is continuous, with an active and innovative community pushing its boundaries. As networks become ever more complex and critical to business operations, eBPF stands ready as the essential technology to unravel their mysteries, ensuring that even in the most intricate digital landscapes, clarity and control remain within reach.

Comparison Table: eBPF vs. Traditional Packet Capture for Network Analysis

Feature	Traditional Packet Capture (e.g., tcpdump)	eBPF-based Header Logging (e.g., using XDP/TC)
Execution Location	User space (after kernel network stack processing)	Kernel space (directly within the network stack, or even before with XDP)
Overhead	High: Copies full packets to user space, high CPU/memory/disk I/O	Low: In-kernel processing, only copies extracted data to user space. JIT compiled.
Data Granularity	Full packet payload (if not encrypted)	Configurable: Specific header elements, metadata, or aggregated flow statistics
Performance	Limited for high-throughput networks (can drop packets under load)	Near line-rate processing, especially with XDP. High throughput.
Filtering Capability	User-space filtering, BPF syntax (classic BPF) applied to sk_buff buffers	In-kernel filtering at various points, custom logic in C-like eBPF programs
Programmability	Limited to predefined filters and user-space post-processing	Highly programmable: Custom logic for inspection, modification, aggregation
System Stability	Low risk to kernel, but can destabilize system if resources are exhausted	High stability due to kernel verifier. No risk of kernel panic due to eBPF prog.
Context Access	Primarily packet data	Packet data, process context, system call arguments, CPU info, timestamps
Real-time Analysis	Challenging for high volume, often post-hoc analysis	Real-time event streaming and in-kernel aggregation
Use Cases	Forensic analysis, deep packet inspection, general network troubleshooting	Real-time performance monitoring, security analytics, DDoS mitigation, dynamic policy enforcement
Deployment	Standard tools, easily deployed	Requires eBPF-compatible kernel, specialized tools for compilation/loading
Data Storage	Pcap files (large), requires specialized tools for analysis	Structured logs/metrics (smaller), integrates with standard logging/TSDB backends
Encryption Impact	Payload opaque, only headers visible	Payload opaque, but sophisticated metadata analysis (e.g., TLS handshake details) possible

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What exactly is eBPF, and how does it differ from traditional packet capture tools like tcpdump?

eBPF (extended Berkeley Packet Filter) is a revolutionary technology that allows custom, sandboxed programs to run directly within the Linux kernel in response to various system events, including network packet arrival. Unlike traditional tools like tcpdump, which copy entire packets from kernel space to user space for processing (incurring significant overhead), eBPF programs execute in kernel space. This enables them to filter, inspect, and aggregate network data with extremely low latency and high efficiency, sending only the most relevant information to user space. eBPF provides unparalleled performance and flexibility for deep network analysis without compromising system stability.

2. How can eBPF efficiently log header elements without impacting system performance?

eBPF achieves efficiency by leveraging several key mechanisms. Firstly, its programs run directly in the kernel and are often Just-In-Time (JIT) compiled into native machine code, providing near-native execution speed. Secondly, eBPF can attach to very early network hooks like XDP (eXpress Data Path), allowing it to filter and process packets before they consume significant kernel resources. Most importantly, eBPF allows for intelligent in-kernel aggregation using "maps," where statistics (like byte counts or packet counts per flow) are updated in kernel space, and only aggregated summaries are periodically sent to user space, drastically reducing data transfer overhead. For individual events, highly optimized perf_event_mmap ring buffers are used for low-latency kernel-to-user-space streaming.

3. What kind of network header elements can eBPF programs typically log?

eBPF programs can log a wide array of header elements across different network layers. This includes: * Layer 2 (Ethernet): Source and Destination MAC addresses, EtherType. * Layer 3 (IP): Source and Destination IP addresses (IPv4/IPv6), Protocol (TCP, UDP, ICMP), TTL (Time To Live), IP flags. * Layer 4 (TCP/UDP): Source and Destination Ports, TCP flags (SYN, ACK, FIN, RST), Sequence and Acknowledgement numbers, Window Size. For unencrypted Layer 7 (HTTP) traffic, eBPF programs can also attempt to parse and log specific HTTP headers like Host, User-Agent, Content-Type, or parts of the URL, though this requires more complex programming and careful handling to ensure verifier compliance. For encrypted traffic, only TLS handshake metadata (like SNI) is typically visible.

4. How does eBPF contribute to network security and troubleshooting?

For security, eBPF enables real-time threat detection by identifying anomalous network patterns (e.g., port scans, DDoS attacks, unusual flag combinations) at the kernel level with high precision. XDP-based eBPF programs can act as ultra-fast firewalls, dropping malicious traffic before it impacts the system. For troubleshooting, eBPF provides deep insights into packet drops, network latency, TCP connection states, and traffic flow characteristics. This granular visibility helps engineers quickly pinpoint root causes of network issues, such as congestion, misconfigurations, or application-level bottlenecks that manifest as network symptoms.

5. How does eBPF complement higher-level API management platforms like APIPark?

eBPF provides foundational, low-level network insights, observing packets and kernel events. This data is crucial for understanding the underlying network health that impacts all services, including those managed by an api gateway. For instance, if an API gateway (like APIPark) reports increased latency or errors for specific API calls, eBPF logs can help diagnose if the issue stems from network congestion, TCP connection problems, or packet drops within the kernel network stack, which might not be visible from the API gateway's own logs. APIPark, as an AI gateway and API management platform, focuses on the lifecycle, performance, and security of APIs themselves. The detailed network data from eBPF acts as a powerful diagnostic layer, providing a holistic view from the raw network layer up to the application API layer, ensuring comprehensive observability and faster issue resolution.

🚀You can securely and efficiently call the OpenAI API on APIPark in just two steps:

Step 1: Deploy the APIPark AI gateway in 5 minutes.

APIPark is developed based on Golang, offering strong product performance and low development and maintenance costs. You can deploy APIPark with a single command line.

curl -sSO https://download.apipark.com/install/quick-start.sh; bash quick-start.sh

In my experience, you can see the successful deployment interface within 5 to 10 minutes. Then, you can log in to APIPark using your account.

Step 2: Call the OpenAI API.