| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
commit 291d044fd51f8484066300ee42afecf8c8db7b3a upstream.
BPF_END and BPF_NEG has a different specification for the source bit in
the opcode compared to other ALU/ALU64 instructions, and is either
reserved or use to specify the byte swap endianness. In both cases the
source bit does not encode source operand location, and src_reg is a
reserved field.
backtrack_insn() currently does not differentiate BPF_END and BPF_NEG
from other ALU/ALU64 instructions, which leads to r0 being incorrectly
marked as precise when processing BPF_ALU | BPF_TO_BE | BPF_END
instructions. This commit teaches backtrack_insn() to correctly mark
precision for such case.
While precise tracking of BPF_NEG and other BPF_END instructions are
correct and does not need fixing, this commit opt to process all BPF_NEG
and BPF_END instructions within the same if-clause to better align with
current convention used in the verifier (e.g. check_alu_op).
Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reported-by: Mohamed Mahmoud <mmahmoud@redhat.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87jzrrwptf.fsf@toke.dk
Tested-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Tao Lyu <tao.lyu@epfl.ch>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231102053913.12004-2-shung-hsi.yu@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 0613d8ca9ab382caabe9ed2dceb429e9781e443f upstream.
A narrow load from a 64-bit context field results in a 64-bit load
followed potentially by a 64-bit right-shift and then a bitwise AND
operation to extract the relevant data.
In the case of a 32-bit access, an immediate mask of 0xffffffff is used
to construct a 64-bit BPP_AND operation which then sign-extends the mask
value and effectively acts as a glorified no-op. For example:
0: 61 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 r0 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 0)
results in the following code generation for a 64-bit field:
ldr x7, [x7] // 64-bit load
mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffff
and x7, x7, x10
Fix the mask generation so that narrow loads always perform a 32-bit AND
operation:
ldr x7, [x7] // 64-bit load
mov w10, #0xffffffff
and w7, w7, w10
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io>
Cc: Andrey Ignatov <rdna@fb.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Fixes: 31fd85816dbe ("bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields")
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230518102528.1341-1-will@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 71b547f561247897a0a14f3082730156c0533fed ]
Juan Jose et al reported an issue found via fuzzing where the verifier's
pruning logic prematurely marks a program path as safe.
Consider the following program:
0: (b7) r6 = 1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0
2: (b7) r8 = 0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
7: (97) r6 %= 1
8: (b7) r9 = 0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
10: (b7) r6 = 0
11: (b7) r0 = 0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff888103693400 // map_ptr(ks=4,vs=48)
15: (bf) r1 = r4
16: (bf) r2 = r10
17: (07) r2 += -4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
20: (95) exit
21: (77) r6 >>= 10
22: (27) r6 *= 8192
23: (bf) r1 = r0
24: (0f) r0 += r6
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0)
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3
27: (95) exit
The verifier treats this as safe, leading to oob read/write access due
to an incorrect verifier conclusion:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r6 = 1024 ; R6_w=1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0 ; R7_w=0
2: (b7) r8 = 0 ; R8_w=0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648 ; R9_w=-2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025 ; R6_w=scalar()
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2 ; R6_w=scalar(umin=18446744071562067969,var_off=(0xffffffff00000000; 0xffffffff)) R9_w=-2147483648
7: (97) r6 %= 1 ; R6_w=scalar()
8: (b7) r9 = 0 ; R9=0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
10: (b7) r6 = 0 ; R6_w=0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 9
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=0
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=0
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 19
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_rw=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 18 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 10: (b7) r6 = 0
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0) ; R0_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3 ; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
27: (95) exit
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_r=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar() R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_rw=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 8 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 8: (b7) r9 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 7: (97) r6 %= 1
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=40 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=40 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=40 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
19: safe
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=40 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=40 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=40 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
from 6 to 9: safe
verification time 110 usec
stack depth 4
processed 36 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 3 peak_states 3 mark_read 2
The verifier considers this program as safe by mistakenly pruning unsafe
code paths. In the above func#0, code lines 0-10 are of interest. In line
0-3 registers r6 to r9 are initialized with known scalar values. In line 4
the register r6 is reset to an unknown scalar given the verifier does not
track modulo operations. Due to this, the verifier can also not determine
precisely which branches in line 6 and 9 are taken, therefore it needs to
explore them both.
As can be seen, the verifier starts with exploring the false/fall-through
paths first. The 'from 19 to 21' path has both r6=0 and r9=0 and the pointer
arithmetic on r0 += r6 is therefore considered safe. Given the arithmetic,
r6 is correctly marked for precision tracking where backtracking kicks in
where it walks back the current path all the way where r6 was set to 0 in
the fall-through branch.
Next, the pruning logics pops the path 'from 9 to 11' from the stack. Also
here, the state of the registers is the same, that is, r6=0 and r9=0, so
that at line 19 the path can be pruned as it is considered safe. It is
interesting to note that the conditional in line 9 turned r6 into a more
precise state, that is, in the fall-through path at the beginning of line
10, it is R6=scalar(umin=1), and in the branch-taken path (which is analyzed
here) at the beginning of line 11, r6 turned into a known const r6=0 as
r9=0 prior to that and therefore (unsigned) r6 <= 0 concludes that r6 must
be 0 (**):
[...] ; R6_w=scalar()
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
[...]
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
[...]
The next path is 'from 6 to 9'. The verifier considers the old and current
state equivalent, and therefore prunes the search incorrectly. Looking into
the two states which are being compared by the pruning logic at line 9, the
old state consists of R6_rwD=Pscalar() R9_rwD=0 R10=fp0 and the new state
consists of R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_w=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968)
R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0. While r6 had the reg->precise flag
correctly set in the old state, r9 did not. Both r6'es are considered as
equivalent given the old one is a superset of the current, more precise one,
however, r9's actual values (0 vs 0x80000000) mismatch. Given the old r9
did not have reg->precise flag set, the verifier does not consider the
register as contributing to the precision state of r6, and therefore it
considered both r9 states as equivalent. However, for this specific pruned
path (which is also the actual path taken at runtime), register r6 will be
0x400 and r9 0x80000000 when reaching line 21, thus oob-accessing the map.
The purpose of precision tracking is to initially mark registers (including
spilled ones) as imprecise to help verifier's pruning logic finding equivalent
states it can then prune if they don't contribute to the program's safety
aspects. For example, if registers are used for pointer arithmetic or to pass
constant length to a helper, then the verifier sets reg->precise flag and
backtracks the BPF program instruction sequence and chain of verifier states
to ensure that the given register or stack slot including their dependencies
are marked as precisely tracked scalar. This also includes any other registers
and slots that contribute to a tracked state of given registers/stack slot.
This backtracking relies on recorded jmp_history and is able to traverse
entire chain of parent states. This process ends only when all the necessary
registers/slots and their transitive dependencies are marked as precise.
The backtrack_insn() is called from the current instruction up to the first
instruction, and its purpose is to compute a bitmask of registers and stack
slots that need precision tracking in the parent's verifier state. For example,
if a current instruction is r6 = r7, then r6 needs precision after this
instruction and r7 needs precision before this instruction, that is, in the
parent state. Hence for the latter r7 is marked and r6 unmarked.
For the class of jmp/jmp32 instructions, backtrack_insn() today only looks
at call and exit instructions and for all other conditionals the masks
remain as-is. However, in the given situation register r6 has a dependency
on r9 (as described above in **), so also that one needs to be marked for
precision tracking. In other words, if an imprecise register influences a
precise one, then the imprecise register should also be marked precise.
Meaning, in the parent state both dest and src register need to be tracked
for precision and therefore the marking must be more conservative by setting
reg->precise flag for both. The precision propagation needs to cover both
for the conditional: if the src reg was marked but not the dst reg and vice
versa.
After the fix the program is correctly rejected:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r6 = 1024 ; R6_w=1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0 ; R7_w=0
2: (b7) r8 = 0 ; R8_w=0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648 ; R9_w=-2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025 ; R6_w=scalar()
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2 ; R6_w=scalar(umin=18446744071562067969,var_off=(0xffffffff80000000; 0x7fffffff),u32_min=-2147483648) R9_w=-2147483648
7: (97) r6 %= 1 ; R6_w=scalar()
8: (b7) r9 = 0 ; R9=0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
10: (b7) r6 = 0 ; R6_w=0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 9
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=0
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=0
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 19
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_rw=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 18 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 10: (b7) r6 = 0
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0) ; R0_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3 ; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
27: (95) exit
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_r=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=240 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar() R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_rw=P0 R10=fp0
last_idx 8 first_idx 0
regs=240 stack=0 before 8: (b7) r9 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 7: (97) r6 %= 1
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
19: safe
from 6 to 9: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_w=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=200 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
11: R6=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R9=-2147483648
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0_w=map_value_or_null(id=3,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0_w=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7=0 R8=0 R9=-2147483648 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=scalar(umax=18014398507384832,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fffffffffffff))
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=scalar(smax=9223372036854767616,umax=18446744073709543424,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffffffffe000),s32_max=2147475456,u32_max=-8192)
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 21
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_r=Pscalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7=0 R8=0 R9=-2147483648 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
regs=240 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
math between map_value pointer and register with unbounded min value is not allowed
verification time 886 usec
stack depth 4
processed 49 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 1 total_states 5 peak_states 5 mark_read 2
Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Reported-by: Juan Jose Lopez Jaimez <jjlopezjaimez@google.com>
Reported-by: Meador Inge <meadori@google.com>
Reported-by: Simon Scannell <simonscannell@google.com>
Reported-by: Nenad Stojanovski <thenenadx@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Co-developed-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Juan Jose Lopez Jaimez <jjlopezjaimez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Meador Inge <meadori@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Scannell <simonscannell@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit e4f4db47794c9f474b184ee1418f42e6a07412b6 ]
To mitigate Spectre v4, 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to
insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation") inserts lfence
instructions after 1) initializing a stack slot and 2) spilling a
pointer to the stack.
However, this does not cover cases where a stack slot is first
initialized with a pointer (subject to sanitization) but then
overwritten with a scalar (not subject to sanitization because
the slot was already initialized). In this case, the second write
may be subject to speculative store bypass (SSB) creating a
speculative pointer-as-scalar type confusion. This allows the
program to subsequently leak the numerical pointer value using,
for example, a branch-based cache side channel.
To fix this, also sanitize scalars if they write a stack slot
that previously contained a pointer. Assuming that pointer-spills
are only generated by LLVM on register-pressure, the performance
impact on most real-world BPF programs should be small.
The following unprivileged BPF bytecode drafts a minimal exploit
and the mitigation:
[...]
// r6 = 0 or 1 (skalar, unknown user input)
// r7 = accessible ptr for side channel
// r10 = frame pointer (fp), to be leaked
//
r9 = r10 # fp alias to encourage ssb
*(u64 *)(r9 - 8) = r10 // fp[-8] = ptr, to be leaked
// lfence added here because of pointer spill to stack.
//
// Ommitted: Dummy bpf_ringbuf_output() here to train alias predictor
// for no r9-r10 dependency.
//
*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r6 // fp[-8] = scalar, overwrites ptr
// 2039f26f3aca: no lfence added because stack slot was not STACK_INVALID,
// store may be subject to SSB
//
// fix: also add an lfence when the slot contained a ptr
//
r8 = *(u64 *)(r9 - 8)
// r8 = architecturally a scalar, speculatively a ptr
//
// leak ptr using branch-based cache side channel:
r8 &= 1 // choose bit to leak
if r8 == 0 goto SLOW // no mispredict
// architecturally dead code if input r6 is 0,
// only executes speculatively iff ptr bit is 1
r8 = *(u64 *)(r7 + 0) # encode bit in cache (0: slow, 1: fast)
SLOW:
[...]
After running this, the program can time the access to *(r7 + 0) to
determine whether the chosen pointer bit was 0 or 1. Repeat this 64
times to recover the whole address on amd64.
In summary, sanitization can only be skipped if one scalar is
overwritten with another scalar. Scalar-confusion due to speculative
store bypass can not lead to invalid accesses because the pointer
bounds deducted during verification are enforced using branchless
logic. See 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on
pointer arithmetic") for details.
Do not make the mitigation depend on !env->allow_{uninit_stack,ptr_leaks}
because speculative leaks are likely unexpected if these were enabled.
For example, leaking the address to a protected log file may be acceptable
while disabling the mitigation might unintentionally leak the address
into the cached-state of a map that is accessible to unprivileged
processes.
Fixes: 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation")
Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst <gerhorst@cs.fau.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Henriette Hofmeier <henriette.hofmeier@rub.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/edc95bad-aada-9cfc-ffe2-fa9bb206583c@cs.fau.de
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230109150544.41465-1-gerhorst@cs.fau.de
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit a3b666bfa9c9edc05bca62a87abafe0936bd7f97 ]
When processing ALU/ALU64 operations (apart from BPF_MOV, which is
handled correctly already; and BPF_NEG and BPF_END are special and don't
have source register), if destination register is already marked
precise, this causes problem with potentially missing precision tracking
for the source register. E.g., when we have r1 >>= r5 and r1 is marked
precise, but r5 isn't, this will lead to r5 staying as imprecise. This
is due to the precision backtracking logic stopping early when it sees
r1 is already marked precise. If r1 wasn't precise, we'd keep
backtracking and would add r5 to the set of registers that need to be
marked precise. So there is a discrepancy here which can lead to invalid
and incompatible states matched due to lack of precision marking on r5.
If r1 wasn't precise, precision backtracking would correctly mark both
r1 and r5 as precise.
This is simple to fix, though. During the forward instruction simulation
pass, for arithmetic operations of `scalar <op>= scalar` form (where
<op> is ALU or ALU64 operations), if destination register is already
precise, mark source register as precise. This applies only when both
involved registers are SCALARs. `ptr += scalar` and `scalar += ptr`
cases are already handled correctly.
This does have (negative) effect on some selftest programs and few
Cilium programs. ~/baseline-tmp-results.csv are veristat results with
this patch, while ~/baseline-results.csv is without it. See post
scriptum for instructions on how to make Cilium programs testable with
veristat. Correctness has a price.
$ ./veristat -C -e file,prog,insns,states ~/baseline-results.csv ~/baseline-tmp-results.csv | grep -v '+0'
File Program Total insns (A) Total insns (B) Total insns (DIFF) Total states (A) Total states (B) Total states (DIFF)
----------------------- -------------------- --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- -------------------
bpf_cubic.bpf.linked1.o bpf_cubic_cong_avoid 997 1700 +703 (+70.51%) 62 90 +28 (+45.16%)
test_l4lb.bpf.linked1.o balancer_ingress 4559 5469 +910 (+19.96%) 118 126 +8 (+6.78%)
----------------------- -------------------- --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- -------------------
$ ./veristat -C -e file,prog,verdict,insns,states ~/baseline-results-cilium.csv ~/baseline-tmp-results-cilium.csv | grep -v '+0'
File Program Total insns (A) Total insns (B) Total insns (DIFF) Total states (A) Total states (B) Total states (DIFF)
------------- ------------------------------ --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- -------------------
bpf_host.o tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6 4448 5261 +813 (+18.28%) 234 247 +13 (+5.56%)
bpf_host.o tail_nodeport_nat_ipv6_egress 3396 3446 +50 (+1.47%) 201 203 +2 (+1.00%)
bpf_lxc.o tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6 4448 5261 +813 (+18.28%) 234 247 +13 (+5.56%)
bpf_overlay.o tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6 4448 5261 +813 (+18.28%) 234 247 +13 (+5.56%)
bpf_xdp.o tail_lb_ipv4 71736 73442 +1706 (+2.38%) 4295 4370 +75 (+1.75%)
------------- ------------------------------ --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- -------------------
P.S. To make Cilium ([0]) programs libbpf-compatible and thus
veristat-loadable, apply changes from topmost commit in [1], which does
minimal changes to Cilium source code, mostly around SEC() annotations
and BPF map definitions.
[0] https://github.com/cilium/cilium/
[1] https://github.com/anakryiko/cilium/commits/libbpf-friendliness
Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221104163649.121784-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
commit 294f2fc6da27620a506e6c050241655459ccd6bd upstream.
Currently, for all op verification we call __red_deduce_bounds() and
__red_bound_offset() but we only call __update_reg_bounds() in bitwise
ops. However, we could benefit from calling __update_reg_bounds() in
BPF_ADD, BPF_SUB, and BPF_MUL cases as well.
For example, a register with state 'R1_w=invP0' when we subtract from
it,
w1 -= 2
Before coerce we will now have an smin_value=S64_MIN, smax_value=U64_MAX
and unsigned bounds umin_value=0, umax_value=U64_MAX. These will then
be clamped to S32_MIN, U32_MAX values by coerce in the case of alu32 op
as done in above example. However tnum will be a constant because the
ALU op is done on a constant.
Without update_reg_bounds() we have a scenario where tnum is a const
but our unsigned bounds do not reflect this. By calling update_reg_bounds
after coerce to 32bit we further refine the umin_value to U64_MAX in the
alu64 case or U32_MAX in the alu32 case above.
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158507151689.15666.566796274289413203.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 2fa7d94afc1afbb4d702760c058dc2d7ed30f226 upstream.
The first commit cited below attempts to fix the off-by-one error that
appeared in some comparisons with an open range. Due to this error,
arithmetically equivalent pieces of code could get different verdicts
from the verifier, for example (pseudocode):
// 1. Passes the verifier:
if (data + 8 > data_end)
return early
read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]
// 2. Rejected by the verifier (should still pass):
if (data + 7 >= data_end)
return early
read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]
The attempted fix, however, shifts the range by one in a wrong
direction, so the bug not only remains, but also such piece of code
starts failing in the verifier:
// 3. Rejected by the verifier, but the check is stricter than in #1.
if (data + 8 >= data_end)
return early
read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]
The change performed by that fix converted an off-by-one bug into
off-by-two. The second commit cited below added the BPF selftests
written to ensure than code chunks like #3 are rejected, however,
they should be accepted.
This commit fixes the off-by-two error by adjusting new_range in the
right direction and fixes the tests by changing the range into the
one that should actually fail.
Fixes: fb2a311a31d3 ("bpf: fix off by one for range markings with L{T, E} patterns")
Fixes: b37242c773b2 ("bpf: add test cases to bpf selftests to cover all access tests")
Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211130181607.593149-1-maximmi@nvidia.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 0e6491b559704da720f6da09dd0a52c4df44c514 ]
Commit 7661809d493b ("mm: don't allow oversized kvmalloc() calls") add the
oversize check. When the allocation is larger than what kmalloc() supports,
the following warning triggered:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8408 at mm/util.c:597 kvmalloc_node+0x108/0x110 mm/util.c:597
Modules linked in:
CPU: 0 PID: 8408 Comm: syz-executor221 Not tainted 5.14.0-syzkaller #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/01/2011
RIP: 0010:kvmalloc_node+0x108/0x110 mm/util.c:597
Call Trace:
kvmalloc include/linux/mm.h:806 [inline]
kvmalloc_array include/linux/mm.h:824 [inline]
kvcalloc include/linux/mm.h:829 [inline]
check_btf_line kernel/bpf/verifier.c:9925 [inline]
check_btf_info kernel/bpf/verifier.c:10049 [inline]
bpf_check+0xd634/0x150d0 kernel/bpf/verifier.c:13759
bpf_prog_load kernel/bpf/syscall.c:2301 [inline]
__sys_bpf+0x11181/0x126e0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4587
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4691 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4689 [inline]
__x64_sys_bpf+0x78/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4689
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0x3d/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
Reported-by: syzbot+f3e749d4c662818ae439@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Bixuan Cui <cuibixuan@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210911005557.45518-1-cuibixuan@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
commit e042aa532c84d18ff13291d00620502ce7a38dda upstream.
In 7fedb63a8307 ("bpf: Tighten speculative pointer arithmetic mask") we
narrowed the offset mask for unprivileged pointer arithmetic in order to
mitigate a corner case where in the speculative domain it is possible to
advance, for example, the map value pointer by up to value_size-1 out-of-
bounds in order to leak kernel memory via side-channel to user space.
The verifier's state pruning for scalars leaves one corner case open
where in the first verification path R_x holds an unknown scalar with an
aux->alu_limit of e.g. 7, and in a second verification path that same
register R_x, here denoted as R_x', holds an unknown scalar which has
tighter bounds and would thus satisfy range_within(R_x, R_x') as well as
tnum_in(R_x, R_x') for state pruning, yielding an aux->alu_limit of 3:
Given the second path fits the register constraints for pruning, the final
generated mask from aux->alu_limit will remain at 7. While technically
not wrong for the non-speculative domain, it would however be possible
to craft similar cases where the mask would be too wide as in 7fedb63a8307.
One way to fix it is to detect the presence of unknown scalar map pointer
arithmetic and force a deeper search on unknown scalars to ensure that
we do not run into a masking mismatch.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[OP: adjusted context in include/linux/bpf_verifier.h for 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit c9e73e3d2b1eb1ea7ff068e05007eec3bd8ef1c9 upstream.
func_states_equal makes a very short lived allocation for idmap,
probably because it's too large to fit on the stack. However the
function is called quite often, leading to a lot of alloc / free
churn. Replace the temporary allocation with dedicated scratch
space in struct bpf_verifier_env.
Signed-off-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210429134656.122225-4-lmb@cloudflare.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[OP: adjusted context for 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 2039f26f3aca5b0e419b98f65dd36481337b86ee upstream.
Spectre v4 gadgets make use of memory disambiguation, which is a set of
techniques that execute memory access instructions, that is, loads and
stores, out of program order; Intel's optimization manual, section 2.4.4.5:
A load instruction micro-op may depend on a preceding store. Many
microarchitectures block loads until all preceding store addresses are
known. The memory disambiguator predicts which loads will not depend on
any previous stores. When the disambiguator predicts that a load does
not have such a dependency, the load takes its data from the L1 data
cache. Eventually, the prediction is verified. If an actual conflict is
detected, the load and all succeeding instructions are re-executed.
af86ca4e3088 ("bpf: Prevent memory disambiguation attack") tried to mitigate
this attack by sanitizing the memory locations through preemptive "fast"
(low latency) stores of zero prior to the actual "slow" (high latency) store
of a pointer value such that upon dependency misprediction the CPU then
speculatively executes the load of the pointer value and retrieves the zero
value instead of the attacker controlled scalar value previously stored at
that location, meaning, subsequent access in the speculative domain is then
redirected to the "zero page".
The sanitized preemptive store of zero prior to the actual "slow" store is
done through a simple ST instruction based on r10 (frame pointer) with
relative offset to the stack location that the verifier has been tracking
on the original used register for STX, which does not have to be r10. Thus,
there are no memory dependencies for this store, since it's only using r10
and immediate constant of zero; hence af86ca4e3088 /assumed/ a low latency
operation.
However, a recent attack demonstrated that this mitigation is not sufficient
since the preemptive store of zero could also be turned into a "slow" store
and is thus bypassed as well:
[...]
// r2 = oob address (e.g. scalar)
// r7 = pointer to map value
31: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r2
// r9 will remain "fast" register, r10 will become "slow" register below
32: (bf) r9 = r10
// JIT maps BPF reg to x86 reg:
// r9 -> r15 (callee saved)
// r10 -> rbp
// train store forward prediction to break dependency link between both r9
// and r10 by evicting them from the predictor's LRU table.
33: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +24576)
34: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29696) = r0
35: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +24580)
36: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29700) = r0
37: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +24584)
38: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29704) = r0
39: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +24588)
40: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29708) = r0
[...]
543: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +25596)
544: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +30716) = r0
// prepare call to bpf_ringbuf_output() helper. the latter will cause rbp
// to spill to stack memory while r13/r14/r15 (all callee saved regs) remain
// in hardware registers. rbp becomes slow due to push/pop latency. below is
// disasm of bpf_ringbuf_output() helper for better visual context:
//
// ffffffff8117ee20: 41 54 push r12
// ffffffff8117ee22: 55 push rbp
// ffffffff8117ee23: 53 push rbx
// ffffffff8117ee24: 48 f7 c1 fc ff ff ff test rcx,0xfffffffffffffffc
// ffffffff8117ee2b: 0f 85 af 00 00 00 jne ffffffff8117eee0 <-- jump taken
// [...]
// ffffffff8117eee0: 49 c7 c4 ea ff ff ff mov r12,0xffffffffffffffea
// ffffffff8117eee7: 5b pop rbx
// ffffffff8117eee8: 5d pop rbp
// ffffffff8117eee9: 4c 89 e0 mov rax,r12
// ffffffff8117eeec: 41 5c pop r12
// ffffffff8117eeee: c3 ret
545: (18) r1 = map[id:4]
547: (bf) r2 = r7
548: (b7) r3 = 0
549: (b7) r4 = 4
550: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_output#194288
// instruction 551 inserted by verifier \
551: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = 0 | /both/ are now slow stores here
// storing map value pointer r7 at fp-16 | since value of r10 is "slow".
552: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r7 /
// following "fast" read to the same memory location, but due to dependency
// misprediction it will speculatively execute before insn 551/552 completes.
553: (79) r2 = *(u64 *)(r9 -16)
// in speculative domain contains attacker controlled r2. in non-speculative
// domain this contains r7, and thus accesses r7 +0 below.
554: (71) r3 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0)
// leak r3
As can be seen, the current speculative store bypass mitigation which the
verifier inserts at line 551 is insufficient since /both/, the write of
the zero sanitation as well as the map value pointer are a high latency
instruction due to prior memory access via push/pop of r10 (rbp) in contrast
to the low latency read in line 553 as r9 (r15) which stays in hardware
registers. Thus, architecturally, fp-16 is r7, however, microarchitecturally,
fp-16 can still be r2.
Initial thoughts to address this issue was to track spilled pointer loads
from stack and enforce their load via LDX through r10 as well so that /both/
the preemptive store of zero /as well as/ the load use the /same/ register
such that a dependency is created between the store and load. However, this
option is not sufficient either since it can be bypassed as well under
speculation. An updated attack with pointer spill/fills now _all_ based on
r10 would look as follows:
[...]
// r2 = oob address (e.g. scalar)
// r7 = pointer to map value
[...]
// longer store forward prediction training sequence than before.
2062: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +25588)
2063: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +30708) = r0
2064: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +25592)
2065: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +30712) = r0
2066: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r7 +25596)
2067: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +30716) = r0
// store the speculative load address (scalar) this time after the store
// forward prediction training.
2068: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r2
// preoccupy the CPU store port by running sequence of dummy stores.
2069: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29696) = r0
2070: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29700) = r0
2071: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29704) = r0
2072: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29708) = r0
2073: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29712) = r0
2074: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29716) = r0
2075: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29720) = r0
2076: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29724) = r0
2077: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29728) = r0
2078: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29732) = r0
2079: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29736) = r0
2080: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29740) = r0
2081: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29744) = r0
2082: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29748) = r0
2083: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29752) = r0
2084: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29756) = r0
2085: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29760) = r0
2086: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29764) = r0
2087: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29768) = r0
2088: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29772) = r0
2089: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29776) = r0
2090: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29780) = r0
2091: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29784) = r0
2092: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29788) = r0
2093: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29792) = r0
2094: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29796) = r0
2095: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29800) = r0
2096: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29804) = r0
2097: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29808) = r0
2098: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29812) = r0
// overwrite scalar with dummy pointer; same as before, also including the
// sanitation store with 0 from the current mitigation by the verifier.
2099: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = 0 | /both/ are now slow stores here
2100: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r7 | since store unit is still busy.
// load from stack intended to bypass stores.
2101: (79) r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
2102: (71) r3 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0)
// leak r3
[...]
Looking at the CPU microarchitecture, the scheduler might issue loads (such
as seen in line 2101) before stores (line 2099,2100) because the load execution
units become available while the store execution unit is still busy with the
sequence of dummy stores (line 2069-2098). And so the load may use the prior
stored scalar from r2 at address r10 -16 for speculation. The updated attack
may work less reliable on CPU microarchitectures where loads and stores share
execution resources.
This concludes that the sanitizing with zero stores from af86ca4e3088 ("bpf:
Prevent memory disambiguation attack") is insufficient. Moreover, the detection
of stack reuse from af86ca4e3088 where previously data (STACK_MISC) has been
written to a given stack slot where a pointer value is now to be stored does
not have sufficient coverage as precondition for the mitigation either; for
several reasons outlined as follows:
1) Stack content from prior program runs could still be preserved and is
therefore not "random", best example is to split a speculative store
bypass attack between tail calls, program A would prepare and store the
oob address at a given stack slot and then tail call into program B which
does the "slow" store of a pointer to the stack with subsequent "fast"
read. From program B PoV such stack slot type is STACK_INVALID, and
therefore also must be subject to mitigation.
2) The STACK_SPILL must not be coupled to register_is_const(&stack->spilled_ptr)
condition, for example, the previous content of that memory location could
also be a pointer to map or map value. Without the fix, a speculative
store bypass is not mitigated in such precondition and can then lead to
a type confusion in the speculative domain leaking kernel memory near
these pointer types.
While brainstorming on various alternative mitigation possibilities, we also
stumbled upon a retrospective from Chrome developers [0]:
[...] For variant 4, we implemented a mitigation to zero the unused memory
of the heap prior to allocation, which cost about 1% when done concurrently
and 4% for scavenging. Variant 4 defeats everything we could think of. We
explored more mitigations for variant 4 but the threat proved to be more
pervasive and dangerous than we anticipated. For example, stack slots used
by the register allocator in the optimizing compiler could be subject to
type confusion, leading to pointer crafting. Mitigating type confusion for
stack slots alone would have required a complete redesign of the backend of
the optimizing compiler, perhaps man years of work, without a guarantee of
completeness. [...]
>From BPF side, the problem space is reduced, however, options are rather
limited. One idea that has been explored was to xor-obfuscate pointer spills
to the BPF stack:
[...]
// preoccupy the CPU store port by running sequence of dummy stores.
[...]
2106: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29796) = r0
2107: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29800) = r0
2108: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29804) = r0
2109: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29808) = r0
2110: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +29812) = r0
// overwrite scalar with dummy pointer; xored with random 'secret' value
// of 943576462 before store ...
2111: (b4) w11 = 943576462
2112: (af) r11 ^= r7
2113: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r11
2114: (79) r11 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
2115: (b4) w2 = 943576462
2116: (af) r2 ^= r11
// ... and restored with the same 'secret' value with the help of AX reg.
2117: (71) r3 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0)
[...]
While the above would not prevent speculation, it would make data leakage
infeasible by directing it to random locations. In order to be effective
and prevent type confusion under speculation, such random secret would have
to be regenerated for each store. The additional complexity involved for a
tracking mechanism that prevents jumps such that restoring spilled pointers
would not get corrupted is not worth the gain for unprivileged. Hence, the
fix in here eventually opted for emitting a non-public BPF_ST | BPF_NOSPEC
instruction which the x86 JIT translates into a lfence opcode. Inserting the
latter in between the store and load instruction is one of the mitigations
options [1]. The x86 instruction manual notes:
[...] An LFENCE that follows an instruction that stores to memory might
complete before the data being stored have become globally visible. [...]
The latter meaning that the preceding store instruction finished execution
and the store is at minimum guaranteed to be in the CPU's store queue, but
it's not guaranteed to be in that CPU's L1 cache at that point (globally
visible). The latter would only be guaranteed via sfence. So the load which
is guaranteed to execute after the lfence for that local CPU would have to
rely on store-to-load forwarding. [2], in section 2.3 on store buffers says:
[...] For every store operation that is added to the ROB, an entry is
allocated in the store buffer. This entry requires both the virtual and
physical address of the target. Only if there is no free entry in the store
buffer, the frontend stalls until there is an empty slot available in the
store buffer again. Otherwise, the CPU can immediately continue adding
subsequent instructions to the ROB and execute them out of order. On Intel
CPUs, the store buffer has up to 56 entries. [...]
One small upside on the fix is that it lifts constraints from af86ca4e3088
where the sanitize_stack_off relative to r10 must be the same when coming
from different paths. The BPF_ST | BPF_NOSPEC gets emitted after a BPF_STX
or BPF_ST instruction. This happens either when we store a pointer or data
value to the BPF stack for the first time, or upon later pointer spills.
The former needs to be enforced since otherwise stale stack data could be
leaked under speculation as outlined earlier. For non-x86 JITs the BPF_ST |
BPF_NOSPEC mapping is currently optimized away, but others could emit a
speculation barrier as well if necessary. For real-world unprivileged
programs e.g. generated by LLVM, pointer spill/fill is only generated upon
register pressure and LLVM only tries to do that for pointers which are not
used often. The program main impact will be the initial BPF_ST | BPF_NOSPEC
sanitation for the STACK_INVALID case when the first write to a stack slot
occurs e.g. upon map lookup. In future we might refine ways to mitigate
the latter cost.
[0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.05178.pdf
[1] https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2018/05/21/analysis-and-mitigation-of-speculative-store-bypass-cve-2018-3639/
[2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.05725.pdf
Fixes: af86ca4e3088 ("bpf: Prevent memory disambiguation attack")
Fixes: f7cf25b2026d ("bpf: track spill/fill of constants")
Co-developed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[OP: - apply check_stack_write_fixed_off() changes in check_stack_write()
- replace env->bypass_spec_v4 -> env->allow_ptr_leaks]
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit d7af7e497f0308bc97809cc48b58e8e0f13887e1 ]
Fix a verifier bug found by smatch static checker in [0].
This problem has never been seen in prod to my best knowledge. Fixing it
still seems to be a good idea since it's hard to say for sure whether
it's possible or not to have a scenario where a combination of
convert_ctx_access() and a narrow load would lead to an out of bound
write.
When narrow load is handled, one or two new instructions are added to
insn_buf array, but before it was only checked that
cnt >= ARRAY_SIZE(insn_buf)
And it's safe to add a new instruction to insn_buf[cnt++] only once. The
second try will lead to out of bound write. And this is what can happen
if `shift` is set.
Fix it by making sure that if the BPF_RSH instruction has to be added in
addition to BPF_AND then there is enough space for two more instructions
in insn_buf.
The full report [0] is below:
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:12304 convert_ctx_accesses() warn: offset 'cnt' incremented past end of array
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:12311 convert_ctx_accesses() warn: offset 'cnt' incremented past end of array
kernel/bpf/verifier.c
12282
12283 insn->off = off & ~(size_default - 1);
12284 insn->code = BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | size_code;
12285 }
12286
12287 target_size = 0;
12288 cnt = convert_ctx_access(type, insn, insn_buf, env->prog,
12289 &target_size);
12290 if (cnt == 0 || cnt >= ARRAY_SIZE(insn_buf) ||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bounds check.
12291 (ctx_field_size && !target_size)) {
12292 verbose(env, "bpf verifier is misconfigured\n");
12293 return -EINVAL;
12294 }
12295
12296 if (is_narrower_load && size < target_size) {
12297 u8 shift = bpf_ctx_narrow_access_offset(
12298 off, size, size_default) * 8;
12299 if (ctx_field_size <= 4) {
12300 if (shift)
12301 insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_RSH,
^^^^^
increment beyond end of array
12302 insn->dst_reg,
12303 shift);
--> 12304 insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, insn->dst_reg,
^^^^^
out of bounds write
12305 (1 << size * 8) - 1);
12306 } else {
12307 if (shift)
12308 insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH,
12309 insn->dst_reg,
12310 shift);
12311 insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, insn->dst_reg,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Same.
12312 (1ULL << size * 8) - 1);
12313 }
12314 }
12315
12316 new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt);
12317 if (!new_prog)
12318 return -ENOMEM;
12319
12320 delta += cnt - 1;
12321
12322 /* keep walking new program and skip insns we just inserted */
12323 env->prog = new_prog;
12324 insn = new_prog->insnsi + i + delta;
12325 }
12326
12327 return 0;
12328 }
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210817050843.GA21456@kili/
v1->v2:
- clarify that problem was only seen by static checker but not in prod;
Fixes: 46f53a65d2de ("bpf: Allow narrow loads with offset > 0")
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrey Ignatov <rdna@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210820163935.1902398-1-rdna@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 75f0fc7b48ad45a2e5736bcf8de26c8872fe8695 ]
In bpf_patch_insn_data(), we first use the bpf_patch_insn_single() to
insert new instructions, then use adjust_insn_aux_data() to adjust
insn_aux_data. If the old env->prog have no enough room for new inserted
instructions, we use bpf_prog_realloc to construct new_prog and free the
old env->prog.
There have two errors here. First, if adjust_insn_aux_data() return
ENOMEM, we should free the new_prog. Second, if adjust_insn_aux_data()
return ENOMEM, bpf_patch_insn_data() will return NULL, and env->prog has
been freed in bpf_prog_realloc, but we will use it in bpf_check().
So in this patch, we make the adjust_insn_aux_data() never fails. In
bpf_patch_insn_data(), we first pre-malloc memory for the new
insn_aux_data, then call bpf_patch_insn_single() to insert new
instructions, at last call adjust_insn_aux_data() to adjust
insn_aux_data.
Fixes: 8041902dae52 ("bpf: adjust insn_aux_data when patching insns")
Signed-off-by: He Fengqing <hefengqing@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210714101815.164322-1-hefengqing@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
commit 2dedd7d2165565bafa89718eaadfc5d1a7865f66 upstream.
Fix "warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size" when
casting u64 addr to void *.
Fixes: a23740ec43ba ("bpf: Track contents of read-only maps as scalars")
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20191011172053.2980619-1-andriin@fb.com
Cc: Rafael David Tinoco <rafaeldtinoco@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit a23740ec43ba022dbfd139d0fe3eff193216272b upstream.
Maps that are read-only both from BPF program side and user space side
have their contents constant, so verifier can track referenced values
precisely and use that knowledge for dead code elimination, branch
pruning, etc. This patch teaches BPF verifier how to do this.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20191009201458.2679171-2-andriin@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Rafael David Tinoco <rafaeldtinoco@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 45c709f8c71b525b51988e782febe84ce933e7e0 ]
"access skb fields ok" verifier test fails on s390 with the "verifier
bug. zext_dst is set, but no reg is defined" message. The first insns
of the test prog are ...
0: 61 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 ldxw %r0,[%r1+0]
8: 35 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 jge %r0,0,1
10: 61 01 00 08 00 00 00 00 ldxw %r0,[%r1+8]
... and the 3rd one is dead (this does not look intentional to me, but
this is a separate topic).
sanitize_dead_code() converts dead insns into "ja -1", but keeps
zext_dst. When opt_subreg_zext_lo32_rnd_hi32() tries to parse such
an insn, it sees this discrepancy and bails. This problem can be seen
only with JITs whose bpf_jit_needs_zext() returns true.
Fix by clearning dead insns' zext_dst.
The commits that contributed to this problem are:
1. 5aa5bd14c5f8 ("bpf: add initial suite for selftests"), which
introduced the test with the dead code.
2. 5327ed3d44b7 ("bpf: verifier: mark verified-insn with
sub-register zext flag"), which introduced the zext_dst flag.
3. 83a2881903f3 ("bpf: Account for BPF_FETCH in
insn_has_def32()"), which introduced the sanity check.
4. 9183671af6db ("bpf: Fix leakage under speculation on
mispredicted branches"), which bisect points to.
It's best to fix this on stable branches that contain the second one,
since that's the point where the inconsistency was introduced.
Fixes: 5327ed3d44b7 ("bpf: verifier: mark verified-insn with sub-register zext flag")
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210812151811.184086-2-iii@linux.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
commit 9183671af6dbf60a1219371d4ed73e23f43b49db upstream
The verifier only enumerates valid control-flow paths and skips paths that
are unreachable in the non-speculative domain. And so it can miss issues
under speculative execution on mispredicted branches.
For example, a type confusion has been demonstrated with the following
crafted program:
// r0 = pointer to a map array entry
// r6 = pointer to readable stack slot
// r9 = scalar controlled by attacker
1: r0 = *(u64 *)(r0) // cache miss
2: if r0 != 0x0 goto line 4
3: r6 = r9
4: if r0 != 0x1 goto line 6
5: r9 = *(u8 *)(r6)
6: // leak r9
Since line 3 runs iff r0 == 0 and line 5 runs iff r0 == 1, the verifier
concludes that the pointer dereference on line 5 is safe. But: if the
attacker trains both the branches to fall-through, such that the following
is speculatively executed ...
r6 = r9
r9 = *(u8 *)(r6)
// leak r9
... then the program will dereference an attacker-controlled value and could
leak its content under speculative execution via side-channel. This requires
to mistrain the branch predictor, which can be rather tricky, because the
branches are mutually exclusive. However such training can be done at
congruent addresses in user space using different branches that are not
mutually exclusive. That is, by training branches in user space ...
A: if r0 != 0x0 goto line C
B: ...
C: if r0 != 0x0 goto line D
D: ...
... such that addresses A and C collide to the same CPU branch prediction
entries in the PHT (pattern history table) as those of the BPF program's
lines 2 and 4, respectively. A non-privileged attacker could simply brute
force such collisions in the PHT until observing the attack succeeding.
Alternative methods to mistrain the branch predictor are also possible that
avoid brute forcing the collisions in the PHT. A reliable attack has been
demonstrated, for example, using the following crafted program:
// r0 = pointer to a [control] map array entry
// r7 = *(u64 *)(r0 + 0), training/attack phase
// r8 = *(u64 *)(r0 + 8), oob address
// [...]
// r0 = pointer to a [data] map array entry
1: if r7 == 0x3 goto line 3
2: r8 = r0
// crafted sequence of conditional jumps to separate the conditional
// branch in line 193 from the current execution flow
3: if r0 != 0x0 goto line 5
4: if r0 == 0x0 goto exit
5: if r0 != 0x0 goto line 7
6: if r0 == 0x0 goto exit
[...]
187: if r0 != 0x0 goto line 189
188: if r0 == 0x0 goto exit
// load any slowly-loaded value (due to cache miss in phase 3) ...
189: r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 + 0x1200)
// ... and turn it into known zero for verifier, while preserving slowly-
// loaded dependency when executing:
190: r3 &= 1
191: r3 &= 2
// speculatively bypassed phase dependency
192: r7 += r3
193: if r7 == 0x3 goto exit
194: r4 = *(u8 *)(r8 + 0)
// leak r4
As can be seen, in training phase (phase != 0x3), the condition in line 1
turns into false and therefore r8 with the oob address is overridden with
the valid map value address, which in line 194 we can read out without
issues. However, in attack phase, line 2 is skipped, and due to the cache
miss in line 189 where the map value is (zeroed and later) added to the
phase register, the condition in line 193 takes the fall-through path due
to prior branch predictor training, where under speculation, it'll load the
byte at oob address r8 (unknown scalar type at that point) which could then
be leaked via side-channel.
One way to mitigate these is to 'branch off' an unreachable path, meaning,
the current verification path keeps following the is_branch_taken() path
and we push the other branch to the verification stack. Given this is
unreachable from the non-speculative domain, this branch's vstate is
explicitly marked as speculative. This is needed for two reasons: i) if
this path is solely seen from speculative execution, then we later on still
want the dead code elimination to kick in in order to sanitize these
instructions with jmp-1s, and ii) to ensure that paths walked in the
non-speculative domain are not pruned from earlier walks of paths walked in
the speculative domain. Additionally, for robustness, we mark the registers
which have been part of the conditional as unknown in the speculative path
given there should be no assumptions made on their content.
The fix in here mitigates type confusion attacks described earlier due to
i) all code paths in the BPF program being explored and ii) existing
verifier logic already ensuring that given memory access instruction
references one specific data structure.
An alternative to this fix that has also been looked at in this scope was to
mark aux->alu_state at the jump instruction with a BPF_JMP_TAKEN state as
well as direction encoding (always-goto, always-fallthrough, unknown), such
that mixing of different always-* directions themselves as well as mixing of
always-* with unknown directions would cause a program rejection by the
verifier, e.g. programs with constructs like 'if ([...]) { x = 0; } else
{ x = 1; }' with subsequent 'if (x == 1) { [...] }'. For unprivileged, this
would result in only single direction always-* taken paths, and unknown taken
paths being allowed, such that the former could be patched from a conditional
jump to an unconditional jump (ja). Compared to this approach here, it would
have two downsides: i) valid programs that otherwise are not performing any
pointer arithmetic, etc, would potentially be rejected/broken, and ii) we are
required to turn off path pruning for unprivileged, where both can be avoided
in this work through pushing the invalid branch to the verification stack.
The issue was originally discovered by Adam and Ofek, and later independently
discovered and reported as a result of Benedict and Piotr's research work.
Fixes: b2157399cc98 ("bpf: prevent out-of-bounds speculation")
Reported-by: Adam Morrison <mad@cs.tau.ac.il>
Reported-by: Ofek Kirzner <ofekkir@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Reported-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[OP: use allow_ptr_leaks instead of bypass_spec_v1]
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit fe9a5ca7e370e613a9a75a13008a3845ea759d6e upstream
... in such circumstances, we do not want to mark the instruction as seen given
the goal is still to jmp-1 rewrite/sanitize dead code, if it is not reachable
from the non-speculative path verification. We do however want to verify it for
safety regardless.
With the patch as-is all the insns that have been marked as seen before the
patch will also be marked as seen after the patch (just with a potentially
different non-zero count). An upcoming patch will also verify paths that are
unreachable in the non-speculative domain, hence this extension is needed.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[OP: - env->pass_cnt is not used in 5.4, so adjust sanitize_mark_insn_seen()
to assign "true" instead
- drop sanitize_insn_aux_data() comment changes, as the function is not
present in 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit d203b0fd863a2261e5d00b97f3d060c4c2a6db71 upstream
Instead of relying on current env->pass_cnt, use the seen count from the
old aux data in adjust_insn_aux_data(), and expand it to the new range of
patched instructions. This change is valid given we always expand 1:n
with n>=1, so what applies to the old/original instruction needs to apply
for the replacement as well.
Not relying on env->pass_cnt is a prerequisite for a later change where we
want to avoid marking an instruction seen when verified under speculative
execution path.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[OP: declare old_data as bool instead of u32 (struct bpf_insn_aux_data.seen
is bool in 5.4)]
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit a7036191277f9fa68d92f2071ddc38c09b1e5ee5 upstream.
In 801c6058d14a ("bpf: Fix leakage of uninitialized bpf stack under
speculation") we replaced masking logic with direct loads of immediates
if the register is a known constant. Given in this case we do not apply
any masking, there is also no reason for the operation to be truncated
under the speculative domain.
Therefore, there is also zero reason for the verifier to branch-off and
simulate this case, it only needs to do it for unknown but bounded scalars.
As a side-effect, this also enables few test cases that were previously
rejected due to simulation under zero truncation.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit bb01a1bba579b4b1c5566af24d95f1767859771e upstream.
Masking direction as indicated via mask_to_left is considered to be
calculated once and then used to derive pointer limits. Thus, this
needs to be placed into bpf_sanitize_info instead so we can pass it
to sanitize_ptr_alu() call after the pointer move. Piotr noticed a
corner case where the off reg causes masking direction change which
then results in an incorrect final aux->alu_limit.
Fixes: 7fedb63a8307 ("bpf: Tighten speculative pointer arithmetic mask")
Reported-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 3d0220f6861d713213b015b582e9f21e5b28d2e0 upstream.
Add a container structure struct bpf_sanitize_info which holds
the current aux info, and update call-sites to sanitize_ptr_alu()
to pass it in. This is needed for passing in additional state
later on.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 801c6058d14a82179a7ee17a4b532cac6fad067f upstream.
The current implemented mechanisms to mitigate data disclosure under
speculation mainly address stack and map value oob access from the
speculative domain. However, Piotr discovered that uninitialized BPF
stack is not protected yet, and thus old data from the kernel stack,
potentially including addresses of kernel structures, could still be
extracted from that 512 bytes large window. The BPF stack is special
compared to map values since it's not zero initialized for every
program invocation, whereas map values /are/ zero initialized upon
their initial allocation and thus cannot leak any prior data in either
domain. In the non-speculative domain, the verifier ensures that every
stack slot read must have a prior stack slot write by the BPF program
to avoid such data leaking issue.
However, this is not enough: for example, when the pointer arithmetic
operation moves the stack pointer from the last valid stack offset to
the first valid offset, the sanitation logic allows for any intermediate
offsets during speculative execution, which could then be used to
extract any restricted stack content via side-channel.
Given for unprivileged stack pointer arithmetic the use of unknown
but bounded scalars is generally forbidden, we can simply turn the
register-based arithmetic operation into an immediate-based arithmetic
operation without the need for masking. This also gives the benefit
of reducing the needed instructions for the operation. Given after
the work in 7fedb63a8307 ("bpf: Tighten speculative pointer arithmetic
mask"), the aux->alu_limit already holds the final immediate value for
the offset register with the known scalar. Thus, a simple mov of the
immediate to AX register with using AX as the source for the original
instruction is sufficient and possible now in this case.
Reported-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit b9b34ddbe2076ade359cd5ce7537d5ed019e9807 upstream.
The negation logic for the case where the off_reg is sitting in the
dst register is not correct given then we cannot just invert the add
to a sub or vice versa. As a fix, perform the final bitwise and-op
unconditionally into AX from the off_reg, then move the pointer from
the src to dst and finally use AX as the source for the original
pointer arithmetic operation such that the inversion yields a correct
result. The single non-AX mov in between is possible given constant
blinding is retaining it as it's not an immediate based operation.
Fixes: 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on pointer arithmetic")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 7fedb63a8307dda0ec3b8969a3b233a1dd7ea8e0 upstream.
This work tightens the offset mask we use for unprivileged pointer arithmetic
in order to mitigate a corner case reported by Piotr and Benedict where in
the speculative domain it is possible to advance, for example, the map value
pointer by up to value_size-1 out-of-bounds in order to leak kernel memory
via side-channel to user space.
Before this change, the computed ptr_limit for retrieve_ptr_limit() helper
represents largest valid distance when moving pointer to the right or left
which is then fed as aux->alu_limit to generate masking instructions against
the offset register. After the change, the derived aux->alu_limit represents
the largest potential value of the offset register which we mask against which
is just a narrower subset of the former limit.
For minimal complexity, we call sanitize_ptr_alu() from 2 observation points
in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(), that is, before and after the simulated alu
operation. In the first step, we retieve the alu_state and alu_limit before
the operation as well as we branch-off a verifier path and push it to the
verification stack as we did before which checks the dst_reg under truncation,
in other words, when the speculative domain would attempt to move the pointer
out-of-bounds.
In the second step, we retrieve the new alu_limit and calculate the absolute
distance between both. Moreover, we commit the alu_state and final alu_limit
via update_alu_sanitation_state() to the env's instruction aux data, and bail
out from there if there is a mismatch due to coming from different verification
paths with different states.
Reported-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de>
[fllinden@amazon.com: backported to 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Frank van der Linden <fllinden@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit f528819334881fd622fdadeddb3f7edaed8b7c9b upstream.
Add a small sanitize_needed() helper function and move sanitize_val_alu()
out of the main opcode switch. In upcoming work, we'll move sanitize_ptr_alu()
as well out of its opcode switch so this helps to streamline both.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[fllinden@amazon.com: backported to 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Frank van der Linden <fllinden@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 073815b756c51ba9d8384d924c5d1c03ca3d1ae4 upstream.
Move the bounds check in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals() into a small helper named
sanitize_check_bounds() in order to simplify the former a bit.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[fllinden@amazon.com: backport to 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Frank van der Linden <fllinden@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit a6aaece00a57fa6f22575364b3903dfbccf5345d upstream.
Consolidate all error handling and provide more user-friendly error messages
from sanitize_ptr_alu() and sanitize_val_alu().
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[fllinden@amazon.com: backport to 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Frank van der Linden <fllinden@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit b658bbb844e28f1862867f37e8ca11a8e2aa94a3 upstream.
Small refactor with no semantic changes in order to consolidate the max
ptr_limit boundary check.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 24c109bb1537c12c02aeed2d51a347b4d6a9b76e upstream.
The mixed signed bounds check really belongs into retrieve_ptr_limit()
instead of outside of it in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(). The reason is
that this check is not tied to PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE only, but to all pointer
types that we handle in retrieve_ptr_limit() and given errors from the latter
propagate back to adjust_ptr_min_max_vals() and lead to rejection of the
program, it's a better place to reside to avoid anything slipping through
for future types. The reason why we must reject such off_reg is that we
otherwise would not be able to derive a mask, see details in 9d7eceede769
("bpf: restrict unknown scalars of mixed signed bounds for unprivileged").
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[fllinden@amazon.com: backport to 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Frank van der Linden <fllinden@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 6f55b2f2a1178856c19bbce2f71449926e731914 upstream.
Small refactor to drag off_reg into sanitize_ptr_alu(), so we later on can
use off_reg for generalizing some of the checks for all pointer types.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 1b1597e64e1a610c7a96710fc4717158e98a08b3 upstream.
Given we know the max possible value of ptr_limit at the time of retrieving
the latter, add basic assertions, so that the verifier can bail out if
anything looks odd and reject the program. Nothing triggered this so far,
but it also does not hurt to have these.
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit b5871dca250cd391885218b99cc015aca1a51aea upstream.
Instead of having the mov32 with aux->alu_limit - 1 immediate, move this
operation to retrieve_ptr_limit() instead to simplify the logic and to
allow for subsequent sanity boundary checks inside retrieve_ptr_limit().
This avoids in future that at the time of the verifier masking rewrite
we'd run into an underflow which would not sign extend due to the nature
of mov32 instruction.
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 10d2bb2e6b1d8c4576c56a748f697dbeb8388899 upstream.
retrieve_ptr_limit() computes the ptr_limit for registers with stack and
map_value type. ptr_limit is the size of the memory area that is still
valid / in-bounds from the point of the current position and direction
of the operation (add / sub). This size will later be used for masking
the operation such that attempting out-of-bounds access in the speculative
domain is redirected to remain within the bounds of the current map value.
When masking to the right the size is correct, however, when masking to
the left, the size is off-by-one which would lead to an incorrect mask
and thus incorrect arithmetic operation in the non-speculative domain.
Piotr found that if the resulting alu_limit value is zero, then the
BPF_MOV32_IMM() from the fixup_bpf_calls() rewrite will end up loading
0xffffffff into AX instead of sign-extending to the full 64 bit range,
and as a result, this allows abuse for executing speculatively out-of-
bounds loads against 4GB window of address space and thus extracting the
contents of kernel memory via side-channel.
Fixes: 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on pointer arithmetic")
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit f232326f6966cf2a1d1db7bc917a4ce5f9f55f76 upstream.
The purpose of this patch is to streamline error propagation and in particular
to propagate retrieve_ptr_limit() errors for pointer types that are not defining
a ptr_limit such that register-based alu ops against these types can be rejected.
The main rationale is that a gap has been identified by Piotr in the existing
protection against speculatively out-of-bounds loads, for example, in case of
ctx pointers, unprivileged programs can still perform pointer arithmetic. This
can be abused to execute speculatively out-of-bounds loads without restrictions
and thus extract contents of kernel memory.
Fix this by rejecting unprivileged programs that attempt any pointer arithmetic
on unprotected pointer types. The two affected ones are pointer to ctx as well
as pointer to map. Field access to a modified ctx' pointer is rejected at a
later point in time in the verifier, and 7c6967326267 ("bpf: Permit map_ptr
arithmetic with opcode add and offset 0") only relevant for root-only use cases.
Risk of unprivileged program breakage is considered very low.
Fixes: 7c6967326267 ("bpf: Permit map_ptr arithmetic with opcode add and offset 0")
Fixes: b2157399cc98 ("bpf: prevent out-of-bounds speculation")
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 9b00f1b78809309163dda2d044d9e94a3c0248a3 upstream.
Recently noticed that when mod32 with a known src reg of 0 is performed,
then the dst register is 32-bit truncated in verifier:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: R0_w=inv0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: R0_w=inv0 R1_w=inv-1 R10=fp0
2: (b4) w2 = -1
3: R0_w=inv0 R1_w=inv-1 R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
3: (9c) w1 %= w0
4: R0_w=inv0 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
4: (b7) r0 = 1
5: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
5: (1d) if r1 == r2 goto pc+1
R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
6: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
6: (b7) r0 = 2
7: R0_w=inv2 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
7: (95) exit
7: R0=inv1 R1=inv(id=0,umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
7: (95) exit
However, as a runtime result, we get 2 instead of 1, meaning the dst
register does not contain (u32)-1 in this case. The reason is fairly
straight forward given the 0 test leaves the dst register as-is:
# ./bpftool p d x i 23
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: (b4) w2 = -1
3: (16) if w0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
4: (9c) w1 %= w0
5: (b7) r0 = 1
6: (1d) if r1 == r2 goto pc+1
7: (b7) r0 = 2
8: (95) exit
This was originally not an issue given the dst register was marked as
completely unknown (aka 64 bit unknown). However, after 468f6eafa6c4
("bpf: fix 32-bit ALU op verification") the verifier casts the register
output to 32 bit, and hence it becomes 32 bit unknown. Note that for
the case where the src register is unknown, the dst register is marked
64 bit unknown. After the fix, the register is truncated by the runtime
and the test passes:
# ./bpftool p d x i 23
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: (b4) w2 = -1
3: (16) if w0 == 0x0 goto pc+2
4: (9c) w1 %= w0
5: (05) goto pc+1
6: (bc) w1 = w1
7: (b7) r0 = 1
8: (1d) if r1 == r2 goto pc+1
9: (b7) r0 = 2
10: (95) exit
Semantics also match with {R,W}x mod{64,32} 0 -> {R,W}x. Invalid div
has always been {R,W}x div{64,32} 0 -> 0. Rewrites are as follows:
mod32: mod64:
(16) if w0 == 0x0 goto pc+2 (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
(9c) w1 %= w0 (9f) r1 %= r0
(05) goto pc+1
(bc) w1 = w1
Fixes: 468f6eafa6c4 ("bpf: fix 32-bit ALU op verification")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit e88b2c6e5a4d9ce30d75391e4d950da74bb2bd90 upstream.
While reviewing a different fix, John and I noticed an oddity in one of the
BPF program dumps that stood out, for example:
# bpftool p d x i 13
0: (b7) r0 = 808464450
1: (b4) w4 = 808464432
2: (bc) w0 = w0
3: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
4: (9c) w4 %= w0
[...]
In line 2 we noticed that the mov32 would 32 bit truncate the original src
register for the div/mod operation. While for the two operations the dst
register is typically marked unknown e.g. from adjust_scalar_min_max_vals()
the src register is not, and thus verifier keeps tracking original bounds,
simplified:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r0 = -1
1: R0_w=invP-1 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: R0_w=invP-1 R1_w=invP-1 R10=fp0
2: (3c) w0 /= w1
3: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R1_w=invP-1 R10=fp0
3: (77) r1 >>= 32
4: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R1_w=invP4294967295 R10=fp0
4: (bf) r0 = r1
5: R0_w=invP4294967295 R1_w=invP4294967295 R10=fp0
5: (95) exit
processed 6 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 0 peak_states 0 mark_read 0
Runtime result of r0 at exit is 0 instead of expected -1. Remove the
verifier mov32 src rewrite in div/mod and replace it with a jmp32 test
instead. After the fix, we result in the following code generation when
having dividend r1 and divisor r6:
div, 64 bit: div, 32 bit:
0: (b7) r6 = 8 0: (b7) r6 = 8
1: (b7) r1 = 8 1: (b7) r1 = 8
2: (55) if r6 != 0x0 goto pc+2 2: (56) if w6 != 0x0 goto pc+2
3: (ac) w1 ^= w1 3: (ac) w1 ^= w1
4: (05) goto pc+1 4: (05) goto pc+1
5: (3f) r1 /= r6 5: (3c) w1 /= w6
6: (b7) r0 = 0 6: (b7) r0 = 0
7: (95) exit 7: (95) exit
mod, 64 bit: mod, 32 bit:
0: (b7) r6 = 8 0: (b7) r6 = 8
1: (b7) r1 = 8 1: (b7) r1 = 8
2: (15) if r6 == 0x0 goto pc+1 2: (16) if w6 == 0x0 goto pc+1
3: (9f) r1 %= r6 3: (9c) w1 %= w6
4: (b7) r0 = 0 4: (b7) r0 = 0
5: (95) exit 5: (95) exit
x86 in particular can throw a 'divide error' exception for div
instruction not only for divisor being zero, but also for the case
when the quotient is too large for the designated register. For the
edx:eax and rdx:rax dividend pair it is not an issue in x86 BPF JIT
since we always zero edx (rdx). Hence really the only protection
needed is against divisor being zero.
Fixes: 68fda450a7df ("bpf: fix 32-bit divide by zero")
Co-developed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 7c6967326267bd5c0dded0a99541357d70dd11ac ]
Commit 41c48f3a98231 ("bpf: Support access
to bpf map fields") added support to access map fields
with CORE support. For example,
struct bpf_map {
__u32 max_entries;
} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
struct bpf_array {
struct bpf_map map;
__u32 elem_size;
} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
struct {
__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY);
__uint(max_entries, 4);
__type(key, __u32);
__type(value, __u32);
} m_array SEC(".maps");
SEC("cgroup_skb/egress")
int cg_skb(void *ctx)
{
struct bpf_array *array = (struct bpf_array *)&m_array;
/* .. array->map.max_entries .. */
}
In kernel, bpf_htab has similar structure,
struct bpf_htab {
struct bpf_map map;
...
}
In the above cg_skb(), to access array->map.max_entries, with CORE, the clang will
generate two builtin's.
base = &m_array;
/* access array.map */
map_addr = __builtin_preserve_struct_access_info(base, 0, 0);
/* access array.map.max_entries */
max_entries_addr = __builtin_preserve_struct_access_info(map_addr, 0, 0);
max_entries = *max_entries_addr;
In the current llvm, if two builtin's are in the same function or
in the same function after inlining, the compiler is smart enough to chain
them together and generates like below:
base = &m_array;
max_entries = *(base + reloc_offset); /* reloc_offset = 0 in this case */
and we are fine.
But if we force no inlining for one of functions in test_map_ptr() selftest, e.g.,
check_default(), the above two __builtin_preserve_* will be in two different
functions. In this case, we will have code like:
func check_hash():
reloc_offset_map = 0;
base = &m_array;
map_base = base + reloc_offset_map;
check_default(map_base, ...)
func check_default(map_base, ...):
max_entries = *(map_base + reloc_offset_max_entries);
In kernel, map_ptr (CONST_PTR_TO_MAP) does not allow any arithmetic.
The above "map_base = base + reloc_offset_map" will trigger a verifier failure.
; VERIFY(check_default(&hash->map, map));
0: (18) r7 = 0xffffb4fe8018a004
2: (b4) w1 = 110
3: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +0) = r1
R1_w=invP110 R7_w=map_value(id=0,off=4,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) R10=fp0
; VERIFY_TYPE(BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH, check_hash);
4: (18) r1 = 0xffffb4fe8018a000
6: (b4) w2 = 1
7: (63) *(u32 *)(r1 +0) = r2
R1_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) R2_w=invP1 R7_w=map_value(id=0,off=4,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) R10=fp0
8: (b7) r2 = 0
9: (18) r8 = 0xffff90bcb500c000
11: (18) r1 = 0xffff90bcb500c000
13: (0f) r1 += r2
R1 pointer arithmetic on map_ptr prohibited
To fix the issue, let us permit map_ptr + 0 arithmetic which will
result in exactly the same map_ptr.
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200908175702.2463625-1-yhs@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 7f6e4312e15a5c370e84eaa685879b6bdcc717e4 ]
Protect against potential stack overflow that might happen when bpf2bpf
calls get combined with tailcalls. Limit the caller's stack depth for
such case down to 256 so that the worst case scenario would result in 8k
stack size (32 which is tailcall limit * 256 = 8k).
Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
commit 6e7e63cbb023976d828cdb22422606bf77baa8a9 upstream.
When check_xadd() verifies an XADD operation on a pointer to a stack slot
containing a spilled pointer, check_stack_read() verifies that the read,
which is part of XADD, is valid. However, since the placeholder value -1 is
passed as `value_regno`, check_stack_read() can only return a binary
decision and can't return the type of the value that was read. The intent
here is to verify whether the value read from the stack slot may be used as
a SCALAR_VALUE; but since check_stack_read() doesn't check the type, and
the type information is lost when check_stack_read() returns, this is not
enforced, and a malicious user can abuse XADD to leak spilled kernel
pointers.
Fix it by letting check_stack_read() verify that the value is usable as a
SCALAR_VALUE if no type information is passed to the caller.
To be able to use __is_pointer_value() in check_stack_read(), move it up.
Fix up the expected unprivileged error message for a BPF selftest that,
until now, assumed that unprivileged users can use XADD on stack-spilled
pointers. This also gives us a test for the behavior introduced in this
patch for free.
In theory, this could also be fixed by forbidding XADD on stack spills
entirely, since XADD is a locked operation (for operations on memory with
concurrency) and there can't be any concurrency on the BPF stack; but
Alexei has said that he wants to keep XADD on stack slots working to avoid
changes to the test suite [1].
The following BPF program demonstrates how to leak a BPF map pointer as an
unprivileged user using this bug:
// r7 = map_pointer
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_7, small_map),
// r8 = launder(map_pointer)
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, BPF_REG_7, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
((struct bpf_insn) {
.code = BPF_STX | BPF_DW | BPF_XADD,
.dst_reg = BPF_REG_FP,
.src_reg = BPF_REG_1,
.off = -8
}),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_FP, -8),
// store r8 into map
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_ARG1, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_ARG2, BPF_REG_FP),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_ARG2, -4),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_ARG2, 0, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN()
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200416211116.qxqcza5vo2ddnkdq@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com/
Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200417000007.10734-1-jannh@google.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ no upstream commit ]
See the glory details in 100605035e15 ("bpf: Verifier, do_refine_retval_range
may clamp umin to 0 incorrectly") for why 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine
retval R0 state for bpf_get_stack helper") is buggy. The whole series however
is not suitable for stable since it adds significant amount [0] of verifier
complexity in order to add 32bit subreg tracking. Something simpler is needed.
Unfortunately, reverting 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine retval R0 state
for bpf_get_stack helper") or just cherry-picking 100605035e15 ("bpf: Verifier,
do_refine_retval_range may clamp umin to 0 incorrectly") is not an option since
it will break existing tracing programs badly (at least those that are using
bpf_get_stack() and bpf_probe_read_str() helpers). Not fixing it in stable is
also not an option since on 4.19 kernels an error will cause a soft-lockup due
to hitting dead-code sanitized branch since we don't hard-wire such branches
in old kernels yet. But even then for 5.x 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine
retval R0 state for bpf_get_stack helper") would cause wrong bounds on the
verifier simluation when an error is hit.
In one of the earlier iterations of mentioned patch series for upstream there
was the concern that just using smax_value in do_refine_retval_range() would
nuke bounds by subsequent <<32 >>32 shifts before the comparison against 0 [1]
which eventually led to the 32bit subreg tracking in the first place. While I
initially went for implementing the idea [1] to pattern match the two shift
operations, it turned out to be more complex than actually needed, meaning, we
could simply treat do_refine_retval_range() similarly to how we branch off
verification for conditionals or under speculation, that is, pushing a new
reg state to the stack for later verification. This means, instead of verifying
the current path with the ret_reg in [S32MIN, msize_max_value] interval where
later bounds would get nuked, we split this into two: i) for the success case
where ret_reg can be in [0, msize_max_value], and ii) for the error case with
ret_reg known to be in interval [S32MIN, -1]. Latter will preserve the bounds
during these shift patterns and can match reg < 0 test. test_progs also succeed
with this approach.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158507130343.15666.8018068546764556975.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158015334199.28573.4940395881683556537.stgit@john-XPS-13-9370/T/#m2e0ad1d5949131014748b6daa48a3495e7f0456d
Fixes: 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine retval R0 state for bpf_get_stack helper")
Reported-by: Lorenzo Fontana <fontanalorenz@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Leonardo Di Donato <leodidonato@gmail.com>
Reported-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Tested-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 604dca5e3af1db98bd123b7bfc02b017af99e3a0 ]
The BPF verifier tried to track values based on 32-bit comparisons by
(ab)using the tnum state via 581738a681b6 ("bpf: Provide better register
bounds after jmp32 instructions"). The idea is that after a check like
this:
if ((u32)r0 > 3)
exit
We can't meaningfully constrain the arithmetic-range-based tracking, but
we can update the tnum state to (value=0,mask=0xffff'ffff'0000'0003).
However, the implementation from 581738a681b6 didn't compute the tnum
constraint based on the fixed operand, but instead derives it from the
arithmetic-range-based tracking. This means that after the following
sequence of operations:
if (r0 >= 0x1'0000'0001)
exit
if ((u32)r0 > 7)
exit
The verifier assumed that the lower half of r0 is in the range (0, 0)
and apply the tnum constraint (value=0,mask=0xffff'ffff'0000'0000) thus
causing the overall tnum to be (value=0,mask=0x1'0000'0000), which was
incorrect. Provide a fixed implementation.
Fixes: 581738a681b6 ("bpf: Provide better register bounds after jmp32 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200330160324.15259-3-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
commit f2d67fec0b43edce8c416101cdc52e71145b5fef upstream.
Anatoly has been fuzzing with kBdysch harness and reported a hang in
one of the outcomes:
0: (b7) r0 = 808464432
1: (7f) r0 >>= r0
2: (14) w0 -= 808464432
3: (07) r0 += 808464432
4: (b7) r1 = 808464432
5: (de) if w1 s<= w0 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=808464432,umax_value=5103431727,var_off=(0x30303020;0x10000001f)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
6: (07) r0 += -2144337872
7: (14) w0 -= -1607454672
8: (25) if r0 > 0x30303030 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=271581184,umax_value=271581311,var_off=(0x10300000;0x7f)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
9: (76) if w0 s>= 0x303030 goto pc+2
12: (95) exit
from 8 to 9: safe
from 5 to 6: R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=808464432,umax_value=5103431727,var_off=(0x30303020;0x10000001f)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
6: (07) r0 += -2144337872
7: (14) w0 -= -1607454672
8: (25) if r0 > 0x30303030 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=271581184,umax_value=271581311,var_off=(0x10300000;0x7f)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
9: safe
from 8 to 9: safe
verification time 589 usec
stack depth 0
processed 17 insns (limit 1000000) [...]
The underlying program was xlated as follows:
# bpftool p d x i 9
0: (b7) r0 = 808464432
1: (7f) r0 >>= r0
2: (14) w0 -= 808464432
3: (07) r0 += 808464432
4: (b7) r1 = 808464432
5: (de) if w1 s<= w0 goto pc+0
6: (07) r0 += -2144337872
7: (14) w0 -= -1607454672
8: (25) if r0 > 0x30303030 goto pc+0
9: (76) if w0 s>= 0x303030 goto pc+2
10: (05) goto pc-1
11: (05) goto pc-1
12: (95) exit
The verifier rewrote original instructions it recognized as dead code with
'goto pc-1', but reality differs from verifier simulation in that we're
actually able to trigger a hang due to hitting the 'goto pc-1' instructions.
Taking different examples to make the issue more obvious: in this example
we're probing bounds on a completely unknown scalar variable in r1:
[...]
5: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
5: (18) r2 = 0x4000000000
7: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0) R2_w=inv274877906944 R10=fp0
7: (18) r3 = 0x2000000000
9: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0) R2_w=inv274877906944 R3_w=inv137438953472 R10=fp0
9: (18) r4 = 0x400
11: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0) R2_w=inv274877906944 R3_w=inv137438953472 R4_w=inv1024 R10=fp0
11: (18) r5 = 0x200
13: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0) R2_w=inv274877906944 R3_w=inv137438953472 R4_w=inv1024 R5_w=inv512 R10=fp0
13: (2d) if r1 > r2 goto pc+4
R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fffffffff)) R2_w=inv274877906944 R3_w=inv137438953472 R4_w=inv1024 R5_w=inv512 R10=fp0
14: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fffffffff)) R2_w=inv274877906944 R3_w=inv137438953472 R4_w=inv1024 R5_w=inv512 R10=fp0
14: (ad) if r1 < r3 goto pc+3
R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=137438953472,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fffffffff)) R2_w=inv274877906944 R3_w=inv137438953472 R4_w=inv1024 R5_w=inv512 R10=fp0
15: R0=inv1 R1=inv(id=0,umin_value=137438953472,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fffffffff)) R2=inv274877906944 R3=inv137438953472 R4=inv1024 R5=inv512 R10=fp0
15: (2e) if w1 > w4 goto pc+2
R0=inv1 R1=inv(id=0,umin_value=137438953472,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7f00000000)) R2=inv274877906944 R3=inv137438953472 R4=inv1024 R5=inv512 R10=fp0
16: R0=inv1 R1=inv(id=0,umin_value=137438953472,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7f00000000)) R2=inv274877906944 R3=inv137438953472 R4=inv1024 R5=inv512 R10=fp0
16: (ae) if w1 < w5 goto pc+1
R0=inv1 R1=inv(id=0,umin_value=137438953472,umax_value=274877906944,var_off=(0x0; 0x7f00000000)) R2=inv274877906944 R3=inv137438953472 R4=inv1024 R5=inv512 R10=fp0
[...]
We're first probing lower/upper bounds via jmp64, later we do a similar
check via jmp32 and examine the resulting var_off there. After fall-through
in insn 14, we get the following bounded r1 with 0x7fffffffff unknown marked
bits in the variable section.
Thus, after knowing r1 <= 0x4000000000 and r1 >= 0x2000000000:
max: 0b100000000000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x4000000000
var: 0b111111111111111111111111111111111111111 / 0x7fffffffff
min: 0b010000000000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x2000000000
Now, in insn 15 and 16, we perform a similar probe with lower/upper bounds
in jmp32.
Thus, after knowing r1 <= 0x4000000000 and r1 >= 0x2000000000 and
w1 <= 0x400 and w1 >= 0x200:
max: 0b100000000000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x4000000000
var: 0b111111100000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x7f00000000
min: 0b010000000000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x2000000000
The lower/upper bounds haven't changed since they have high bits set in
u64 space and the jmp32 tests can only refine bounds in the low bits.
However, for the var part the expectation would have been 0x7f000007ff
or something less precise up to 0x7fffffffff. A outcome of 0x7f00000000
is not correct since it would contradict the earlier probed bounds
where we know that the result should have been in [0x200,0x400] in u32
space. Therefore, tests with such info will lead to wrong verifier
assumptions later on like falsely predicting conditional jumps to be
always taken, etc.
The issue here is that __reg_bound_offset32()'s implementation from
commit 581738a681b6 ("bpf: Provide better register bounds after jmp32
instructions") makes an incorrect range assumption:
static void __reg_bound_offset32(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
{
u64 mask = 0xffffFFFF;
struct tnum range = tnum_range(reg->umin_value & mask,
reg->umax_value & mask);
struct tnum lo32 = tnum_cast(reg->var_off, 4);
struct tnum hi32 = tnum_lshift(tnum_rshift(reg->var_off, 32), 32);
reg->var_off = tnum_or(hi32, tnum_intersect(lo32, range));
}
In the above walk-through example, __reg_bound_offset32() as-is chose
a range after masking with 0xffffffff of [0x0,0x0] since umin:0x2000000000
and umax:0x4000000000 and therefore the lo32 part was clamped to 0x0 as
well. However, in the umin:0x2000000000 and umax:0x4000000000 range above
we'd end up with an actual possible interval of [0x0,0xffffffff] for u32
space instead.
In case of the original reproducer, the situation looked as follows at
insn 5 for r0:
[...]
5: R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=808464432,umax_value=5103431727,var_off=(0x0; 0x1ffffffff)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
0x30303030 0x13030302f
5: (de) if w1 s<= w0 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=808464432,umax_value=5103431727,var_off=(0x30303020; 0x10000001f)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
0x30303030 0x13030302f
[...]
After the fall-through, we similarly forced the var_off result into
the wrong range [0x30303030,0x3030302f] suggesting later on that fixed
bits must only be of 0x30303020 with 0x10000001f unknowns whereas such
assumption can only be made when both bounds in hi32 range match.
Originally, I was thinking to fix this by moving reg into a temp reg and
use proper coerce_reg_to_size() helper on the temp reg where we can then
based on that define the range tnum for later intersection:
static void __reg_bound_offset32(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
{
struct bpf_reg_state tmp = *reg;
struct tnum lo32, hi32, range;
coerce_reg_to_size(&tmp, 4);
range = tnum_range(tmp.umin_value, tmp.umax_value);
lo32 = tnum_cast(reg->var_off, 4);
hi32 = tnum_lshift(tnum_rshift(reg->var_off, 32), 32);
reg->var_off = tnum_or(hi32, tnum_intersect(lo32, range));
}
In the case of the concrete example, this gives us a more conservative unknown
section. Thus, after knowing r1 <= 0x4000000000 and r1 >= 0x2000000000 and
w1 <= 0x400 and w1 >= 0x200:
max: 0b100000000000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x4000000000
var: 0b111111111111111111111111111111111111111 / 0x7fffffffff
min: 0b010000000000000000000000000000000000000 / 0x2000000000
However, above new __reg_bound_offset32() has no effect on refining the
knowledge of the register contents. Meaning, if the bounds in hi32 range
mismatch we'll get the identity function given the range reg spans
[0x0,0xffffffff] and we cast var_off into lo32 only to later on binary
or it again with the hi32.
Likewise, if the bounds in hi32 range match, then we mask both bounds
with 0xffffffff, use the resulting umin/umax for the range to later
intersect the lo32 with it. However, _prior_ called __reg_bound_offset()
did already such intersection on the full reg and we therefore would only
repeat the same operation on the lo32 part twice.
Given this has no effect and the original commit had false assumptions,
this patch reverts the code entirely which is also more straight forward
for stable trees: apparently 581738a681b6 got auto-selected by Sasha's
ML system and misclassified as a fix, so it got sucked into v5.4 where
it should never have landed. A revert is low-risk also from a user PoV
since it requires a recent kernel and llc to opt-into -mcpu=v3 BPF CPU
to generate jmp32 instructions. A proper bounds refinement would need a
significantly more complex approach which is currently being worked, but
no stable material [0]. Hence revert is best option for stable. After the
revert, the original reported program gets rejected as follows:
1: (7f) r0 >>= r0
2: (14) w0 -= 808464432
3: (07) r0 += 808464432
4: (b7) r1 = 808464432
5: (de) if w1 s<= w0 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=808464432,umax_value=5103431727,var_off=(0x0; 0x1ffffffff)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
6: (07) r0 += -2144337872
7: (14) w0 -= -1607454672
8: (25) if r0 > 0x30303030 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=808464432,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fffffff)) R1_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
9: (76) if w0 s>= 0x303030 goto pc+2
R0=invP(id=0,umax_value=3158063,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fffff)) R1=invP808464432 R10=fp0
10: (30) r0 = *(u8 *)skb[808464432]
BPF_LD_[ABS|IND] uses reserved fields
processed 11 insns (limit 1000000) [...]
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158507130343.15666.8018068546764556975.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower/T/
Fixes: 581738a681b6 ("bpf: Provide better register bounds after jmp32 instructions")
Reported-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <anatoly.trosinenko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200330160324.15259-2-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 0af2ffc93a4b50948f9dad2786b7f1bd253bf0b9 upstream.
Anatoly has been fuzzing with kBdysch harness and reported a hang in one
of the outcomes:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (85) call bpf_get_socket_cookie#46
1: R0_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
1: (57) r0 &= 808464432
2: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=808464432,var_off=(0x0; 0x30303030)) R10=fp0
2: (14) w0 -= 810299440
3: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0xcf800000; 0x3077fff0)) R10=fp0
3: (c4) w0 s>>= 1
4: R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=1740636160,umax_value=2147221496,var_off=(0x67c00000; 0x183bfff8)) R10=fp0
4: (76) if w0 s>= 0x30303030 goto pc+216
221: R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=1740636160,umax_value=2147221496,var_off=(0x67c00000; 0x183bfff8)) R10=fp0
221: (95) exit
processed 6 insns (limit 1000000) [...]
Taking a closer look, the program was xlated as follows:
# ./bpftool p d x i 12
0: (85) call bpf_get_socket_cookie#7800896
1: (bf) r6 = r0
2: (57) r6 &= 808464432
3: (14) w6 -= 810299440
4: (c4) w6 s>>= 1
5: (76) if w6 s>= 0x30303030 goto pc+216
6: (05) goto pc-1
7: (05) goto pc-1
8: (05) goto pc-1
[...]
220: (05) goto pc-1
221: (05) goto pc-1
222: (95) exit
Meaning, the visible effect is very similar to f54c7898ed1c ("bpf: Fix
precision tracking for unbounded scalars"), that is, the fall-through
branch in the instruction 5 is considered to be never taken given the
conclusion from the min/max bounds tracking in w6, and therefore the
dead-code sanitation rewrites it as goto pc-1. However, real-life input
disagrees with verification analysis since a soft-lockup was observed.
The bug sits in the analysis of the ARSH. The definition is that we shift
the target register value right by K bits through shifting in copies of
its sign bit. In adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(), we do first coerce the
register into 32 bit mode, same happens after simulating the operation.
However, for the case of simulating the actual ARSH, we don't take the
mode into account and act as if it's always 64 bit, but location of sign
bit is different:
dst_reg->smin_value >>= umin_val;
dst_reg->smax_value >>= umin_val;
dst_reg->var_off = tnum_arshift(dst_reg->var_off, umin_val);
Consider an unknown R0 where bpf_get_socket_cookie() (or others) would
for example return 0xffff. With the above ARSH simulation, we'd see the
following results:
[...]
1: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP65535 R10=fp0
1: (85) call bpf_get_socket_cookie#46
2: R0_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
2: (57) r0 &= 808464432
-> R0_runtime = 0x3030
3: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=808464432,var_off=(0x0; 0x30303030)) R10=fp0
3: (14) w0 -= 810299440
-> R0_runtime = 0xcfb40000
4: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0xcf800000; 0x3077fff0)) R10=fp0
(0xffffffff)
4: (c4) w0 s>>= 1
-> R0_runtime = 0xe7da0000
5: R0_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=1740636160,umax_value=2147221496,var_off=(0x67c00000; 0x183bfff8)) R10=fp0
(0x67c00000) (0x7ffbfff8)
[...]
In insn 3, we have a runtime value of 0xcfb40000, which is '1100 1111 1011
0100 0000 0000 0000 0000', the result after the shift has 0xe7da0000 that
is '1110 0111 1101 1010 0000 0000 0000 0000', where the sign bit is correctly
retained in 32 bit mode. In insn4, the umax was 0xffffffff, and changed into
0x7ffbfff8 after the shift, that is, '0111 1111 1111 1011 1111 1111 1111 1000'
and means here that the simulation didn't retain the sign bit. With above
logic, the updates happen on the 64 bit min/max bounds and given we coerced
the register, the sign bits of the bounds are cleared as well, meaning, we
need to force the simulation into s32 space for 32 bit alu mode.
Verification after the fix below. We're first analyzing the fall-through branch
on 32 bit signed >= test eventually leading to rejection of the program in this
specific case:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r2 = 808464432
1: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP808464432 R10=fp0
1: (85) call bpf_get_socket_cookie#46
2: R0_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
2: (bf) r6 = r0
3: R0_w=invP(id=0) R6_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
3: (57) r6 &= 808464432
4: R0_w=invP(id=0) R6_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=808464432,var_off=(0x0; 0x30303030)) R10=fp0
4: (14) w6 -= 810299440
5: R0_w=invP(id=0) R6_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0xcf800000; 0x3077fff0)) R10=fp0
5: (c4) w6 s>>= 1
6: R0_w=invP(id=0) R6_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=3888119808,umax_value=4294705144,var_off=(0xe7c00000; 0x183bfff8)) R10=fp0
(0x67c00000) (0xfffbfff8)
6: (76) if w6 s>= 0x30303030 goto pc+216
7: R0_w=invP(id=0) R6_w=invP(id=0,umin_value=3888119808,umax_value=4294705144,var_off=(0xe7c00000; 0x183bfff8)) R10=fp0
7: (30) r0 = *(u8 *)skb[808464432]
BPF_LD_[ABS|IND] uses reserved fields
processed 8 insns (limit 1000000) [...]
Fixes: 9cbe1f5a32dc ("bpf/verifier: improve register value range tracking with ARSH")
Reported-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <anatoly.trosinenko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200115204733.16648-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 6d4f151acf9a4f6fab09b615f246c717ddedcf0c upstream.
Anatoly has been fuzzing with kBdysch harness and reported a KASAN
slab oob in one of the outcomes:
[...]
[ 77.359642] BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x71/0x130
[ 77.360463] Read of size 4 at addr ffff8880679bac68 by task bpf/406
[ 77.361119]
[ 77.361289] CPU: 2 PID: 406 Comm: bpf Not tainted 5.5.0-rc2-xfstests-00157-g2187f215eba #1
[ 77.362134] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.12.0-1 04/01/2014
[ 77.362984] Call Trace:
[ 77.363249] dump_stack+0x97/0xe0
[ 77.363603] print_address_description.constprop.0+0x1d/0x220
[ 77.364251] ? bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x71/0x130
[ 77.365030] ? bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x71/0x130
[ 77.365860] __kasan_report.cold+0x37/0x7b
[ 77.366365] ? bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x71/0x130
[ 77.366940] kasan_report+0xe/0x20
[ 77.367295] bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x71/0x130
[ 77.367821] ? bpf_skb_load_helper_8+0xf0/0xf0
[ 77.368278] ? mark_lock+0xa3/0x9b0
[ 77.368641] ? kvm_sched_clock_read+0x14/0x30
[ 77.369096] ? sched_clock+0x5/0x10
[ 77.369460] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x18/0x110
[ 77.369876] ? bpf_skb_load_helper_8+0xf0/0xf0
[ 77.370330] ___bpf_prog_run+0x16c0/0x28f0
[ 77.370755] __bpf_prog_run32+0x83/0xc0
[ 77.371153] ? __bpf_prog_run64+0xc0/0xc0
[ 77.371568] ? match_held_lock+0x1b/0x230
[ 77.371984] ? rcu_read_lock_held+0xa1/0xb0
[ 77.372416] ? rcu_is_watching+0x34/0x50
[ 77.372826] sk_filter_trim_cap+0x17c/0x4d0
[ 77.373259] ? sock_kzfree_s+0x40/0x40
[ 77.373648] ? __get_filter+0x150/0x150
[ 77.374059] ? skb_copy_datagram_from_iter+0x80/0x280
[ 77.374581] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0xa5/0x140
[ 77.375025] unix_dgram_sendmsg+0x33a/0xa70
[ 77.375459] ? do_raw_spin_lock+0x1d0/0x1d0
[ 77.375893] ? unix_peer_get+0xa0/0xa0
[ 77.376287] ? __fget_light+0xa4/0xf0
[ 77.376670] __sys_sendto+0x265/0x280
[ 77.377056] ? __ia32_sys_getpeername+0x50/0x50
[ 77.377523] ? lock_downgrade+0x350/0x350
[ 77.377940] ? __sys_setsockopt+0x2a6/0x2c0
[ 77.378374] ? sock_read_iter+0x240/0x240
[ 77.378789] ? __sys_socketpair+0x22a/0x300
[ 77.379221] ? __ia32_sys_socket+0x50/0x50
[ 77.379649] ? mark_held_locks+0x1d/0x90
[ 77.380059] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x1a/0x1c
[ 77.380536] __x64_sys_sendto+0x74/0x90
[ 77.380938] do_syscall_64+0x68/0x2a0
[ 77.381324] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
[ 77.381878] RIP: 0033:0x44c070
[...]
After further debugging, turns out while in case of other helper functions
we disallow passing modified ctx, the special case of ld/abs/ind instruction
which has similar semantics (except r6 being the ctx argument) is missing
such check. Modified ctx is impossible here as bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache()
and others are expecting skb fields in original position, hence, add
check_ctx_reg() to reject any modified ctx. Issue was first introduced back
in f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking").
Fixes: f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking")
Reported-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <anatoly.trosinenko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200106215157.3553-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit f54c7898ed1c3c9331376c0337a5049c38f66497 upstream.
Anatoly has been fuzzing with kBdysch harness and reported a hang in one
of the outcomes. Upon closer analysis, it turns out that precise scalar
value tracking is missing a few precision markings for unknown scalars:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: R0_w=invP0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
1: (35) if r0 >= 0xf72e goto pc+0
--> only follow fallthrough
2: R0_w=invP0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
2: (35) if r0 >= 0x80fe0000 goto pc+0
--> only follow fallthrough
3: R0_w=invP0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
3: (14) w0 -= -536870912
4: R0_w=invP536870912 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
4: (0f) r1 += r0
5: R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
5: (55) if r1 != 0x104c1500 goto pc+0
--> push other branch for later analysis
R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=inv273421568 R10=fp0
6: R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=inv273421568 R10=fp0
6: (b7) r0 = 0
7: R0=invP0 R1=inv273421568 R10=fp0
7: (76) if w1 s>= 0xffffff00 goto pc+3
--> only follow goto
11: R0=invP0 R1=inv273421568 R10=fp0
11: (95) exit
6: R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
6: (b7) r0 = 0
propagating r0
7: safe
processed 11 insns [...]
In the analysis of the second path coming after the successful exit above,
the path is being pruned at line 7. Pruning analysis found that both r0 are
precise P0 and both R1 are non-precise scalars and given prior path with
R1 as non-precise scalar succeeded, this one is therefore safe as well.
However, problem is that given condition at insn 7 in the first run, we only
followed goto and didn't push the other branch for later analysis, we've
never walked the few insns in there and therefore dead-code sanitation
rewrites it as goto pc-1, causing the hang depending on the skb address
hitting these conditions. The issue is that R1 should have been marked as
precise as well such that pruning enforces range check and conluded that new
R1 is not in range of old R1. In insn 4, we mark R1 (skb) as unknown scalar
via __mark_reg_unbounded() but not mark_reg_unbounded() and therefore
regs->precise remains as false.
Back in b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking"), this was not
the case since marking out of __mark_reg_unbounded() had this covered as well.
Once in both are set as precise in 4 as they should have been, we conclude
that given R1 was in prior fall-through path 0x104c1500 and now is completely
unknown, the check at insn 7 concludes that we need to continue walking.
Analysis after the fix:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: R0_w=invP0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
1: (35) if r0 >= 0xf72e goto pc+0
2: R0_w=invP0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
2: (35) if r0 >= 0x80fe0000 goto pc+0
3: R0_w=invP0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
3: (14) w0 -= -536870912
4: R0_w=invP536870912 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
4: (0f) r1 += r0
5: R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
5: (55) if r1 != 0x104c1500 goto pc+0
R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=invP273421568 R10=fp0
6: R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=invP273421568 R10=fp0
6: (b7) r0 = 0
7: R0=invP0 R1=invP273421568 R10=fp0
7: (76) if w1 s>= 0xffffff00 goto pc+3
11: R0=invP0 R1=invP273421568 R10=fp0
11: (95) exit
6: R0_w=invP536870912 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
6: (b7) r0 = 0
7: R0_w=invP0 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
7: (76) if w1 s>= 0xffffff00 goto pc+3
R0_w=invP0 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
8: R0_w=invP0 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
8: (a5) if r0 < 0x2007002a goto pc+0
9: R0_w=invP0 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
9: (57) r0 &= -16316416
10: R0_w=invP0 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
10: (a6) if w0 < 0x1201 goto pc+0
11: R0_w=invP0 R1_w=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
11: (95) exit
11: R0=invP0 R1=invP(id=0) R10=fp0
11: (95) exit
processed 16 insns [...]
Fixes: 6754172c208d ("bpf: fix precision tracking in presence of bpf2bpf calls")
Reported-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <anatoly.trosinenko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20191222223740.25297-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 581738a681b6faae5725c2555439189ca81c0f1f ]
With latest llvm (trunk https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project),
test_progs, which has +alu32 enabled, failed for strobemeta.o.
The verifier output looks like below with edit to replace large
decimal numbers with hex ones.
193: (85) call bpf_probe_read_user_str#114
R0=inv(id=0)
194: (26) if w0 > 0x1 goto pc+4
R0_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=0xffffffff00000001)
195: (6b) *(u16 *)(r7 +80) = r0
196: (bc) w6 = w0
R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
197: (67) r6 <<= 32
R6_w=inv(id=0,smax_value=0x7fffffff00000000,umax_value=0xffffffff00000000,
var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff00000000))
198: (77) r6 >>= 32
R6=inv(id=0,umax_value=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
...
201: (79) r8 = *(u64 *)(r10 -416)
R8_w=map_value(id=0,off=40,ks=4,vs=13872,imm=0)
202: (0f) r8 += r6
R8_w=map_value(id=0,off=40,ks=4,vs=13872,umax_value=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
203: (07) r8 += 9696
R8_w=map_value(id=0,off=9736,ks=4,vs=13872,umax_value=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
...
255: (bf) r1 = r8
R1_w=map_value(id=0,off=9736,ks=4,vs=13872,umax_value=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
...
257: (85) call bpf_probe_read_user_str#114
R1 unbounded memory access, make sure to bounds check any array access into a map
The value range for register r6 at insn 198 should be really just 0/1.
The umax_value=0xffffffff caused later verification failure.
After jmp instructions, the current verifier already tried to use just
obtained information to get better register range. The current mechanism is
for 64bit register only. This patch implemented to tighten the range
for 32bit sub-registers after jmp32 instructions.
With the patch, we have the below range ranges for the
above code sequence:
193: (85) call bpf_probe_read_user_str#114
R0=inv(id=0)
194: (26) if w0 > 0x1 goto pc+4
R0_w=inv(id=0,smax_value=0x7fffffff00000001,umax_value=0xffffffff00000001,
var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff00000001))
195: (6b) *(u16 *)(r7 +80) = r0
196: (bc) w6 = w0
R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0x1))
197: (67) r6 <<= 32
R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=0x100000000,var_off=(0x0; 0x100000000))
198: (77) r6 >>= 32
R6=inv(id=0,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1))
...
201: (79) r8 = *(u64 *)(r10 -416)
R8_w=map_value(id=0,off=40,ks=4,vs=13872,imm=0)
202: (0f) r8 += r6
R8_w=map_value(id=0,off=40,ks=4,vs=13872,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1))
203: (07) r8 += 9696
R8_w=map_value(id=0,off=9736,ks=4,vs=13872,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1))
...
255: (bf) r1 = r8
R1_w=map_value(id=0,off=9736,ks=4,vs=13872,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1))
...
257: (85) call bpf_probe_read_user_str#114
...
At insn 194, the register R0 has better var_off.mask and smax_value.
Especially, the var_off.mask ensures later lshift and rshift
maintains proper value range.
Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20191121170650.449030-1-yhs@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
|
|
Daniel Borkmann says:
====================
pull-request: bpf-next 2019-09-16
The following pull-request contains BPF updates for your *net-next* tree.
The main changes are:
1) Now that initial BPF backend for gcc has been merged upstream, enable
BPF kselftest suite for bpf-gcc. Also fix a BE issue with access to
bpf_sysctl.file_pos, from Ilya.
2) Follow-up fix for link-vmlinux.sh to remove bash-specific extensions
related to recent work on exposing BTF info through sysfs, from Andrii.
3) AF_XDP zero copy fixes for i40e and ixgbe driver which caused umem
headroom to be added twice, from Ciara.
4) Refactoring work to convert sock opt tests into test_progs framework
in BPF kselftests, from Stanislav.
5) Fix a general protection fault in dev_map_hash_update_elem(), from Toke.
6) Cleanup to use BPF_PROG_RUN() macro in KCM, from Sami.
====================
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
"ctx:file_pos sysctl:read write ok" fails on s390 with "Read value !=
nux". This is because verifier rewrites a complete 32-bit
bpf_sysctl.file_pos update to a partial update of the first 32 bits of
64-bit *bpf_sysctl_kern.ppos, which is not correct on big-endian
systems.
Fix by using an offset on big-endian systems.
Ditto for bpf_sysctl.file_pos reads. Currently the test does not detect
a problem there, since it expects to see 0, which it gets with high
probability in error cases, so change it to seek to offset 3 and expect
3 in bpf_sysctl.file_pos.
Fixes: e1550bfe0de4 ("bpf: Add file_pos field to bpf_sysctl ctx")
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20190816105300.49035-1-iii@linux.ibm.com/
|
|
Minor overlapping changes in the btusb and ixgbe drivers.
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
