Commit Graph

676 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Luis Gerhorst
118df5df1b bpf: Remove misleading spec_v1 check on var-offset stack read
[ Upstream commit 082cdc69a4651dd2a77539d69416a359ed1214f5 ]

For every BPF_ADD/SUB involving a pointer, adjust_ptr_min_max_vals()
ensures that the resulting pointer has a constant offset if
bypass_spec_v1 is false. This is ensured by calling sanitize_check_bounds()
which in turn calls check_stack_access_for_ptr_arithmetic(). There,
-EACCESS is returned if the register's offset is not constant, thereby
rejecting the program.

In summary, an unprivileged user must never be able to create stack
pointers with a variable offset. That is also the case, because a
respective check in check_stack_write() is missing. If they were able
to create a variable-offset pointer, users could still use it in a
stack-write operation to trigger unsafe speculative behavior [1].

Because unprivileged users must already be prevented from creating
variable-offset stack pointers, viable options are to either remove
this check (replacing it with a clarifying comment), or to turn it
into a "verifier BUG"-message, also adding a similar check in
check_stack_write() (for consistency, as a second-level defense).
This patch implements the first option to reduce verifier bloat.

This check was introduced by commit 01f810ace9ed ("bpf: Allow
variable-offset stack access") which correctly notes that
"variable-offset reads and writes are disallowed (they were already
disallowed for the indirect access case) because the speculative
execution checking code doesn't support them". However, it does not
further discuss why the check in check_stack_read() is necessary.
The code which made this check obsolete was also introduced in this
commit.

I have compiled ~650 programs from the Linux selftests, Linux samples,
Cilium, and libbpf/examples projects and confirmed that none of these
trigger the check in check_stack_read() [2]. Instead, all of these
programs are, as expected, already rejected when constructing the
variable-offset pointers. Note that the check in
check_stack_access_for_ptr_arithmetic() also prints "off=%d" while the
code removed by this patch does not (the error removed does not appear
in the "verification_error" values). For reproducibility, the
repository linked includes the raw data and scripts used to create
the plot.

  [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.03757.pdf
  [2] 53dc19fcf4/data/plots/23-02-26_23-56_bpftool/bpftool/0004-errors.pdf

Fixes: 01f810ace9ed ("bpf: Allow variable-offset stack access")
Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst <gerhorst@cs.fau.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230315165358.23701-1-gerhorst@cs.fau.de
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-05-17 11:47:47 +02:00
Andrii Nakryiko
10702be8b3 bpf: fix precision propagation verbose logging
[ Upstream commit 34f0677e7afd3a292bc1aadda7ce8e35faedb204 ]

Fix wrong order of frame index vs register/slot index in precision
propagation verbose (level 2) output. It's wrong and very confusing as is.

Fixes: 529409ea92d5 ("bpf: propagate precision across all frames, not just the last one")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230313184017.4083374-1-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-05-17 11:47:47 +02:00
Andrii Nakryiko
6be8ad4cdc bpf: take into account liveness when propagating precision
[ Upstream commit 52c2b005a3c18c565fc70cfd0ca49375f301e952 ]

When doing state comparison, if old state has register that is not
marked as REG_LIVE_READ, then we just skip comparison, regardless what's
the state of corresponing register in current state. This is because not
REG_LIVE_READ register is irrelevant for further program execution and
correctness. All good here.

But when we get to precision propagation, after two states were declared
equivalent, we don't take into account old register's liveness, and thus
attempt to propagate precision for register in current state even if
that register in old state was not REG_LIVE_READ anymore. This is bad,
because register in current state could be anything at all and this
could cause -EFAULT due to internal logic bugs.

Fix by taking into account REG_LIVE_READ liveness mark to keep the logic
in state comparison in sync with precision propagation.

Fixes: a3ce685dd0 ("bpf: fix precision tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230309224131.57449-1-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-05-17 11:47:47 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
b1281d0088 bpf: Fix incorrect verifier pruning due to missing register precision taints
[ 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: b5dc0163d8 ("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>
2023-04-26 11:27:36 +02:00
Martin KaFai Lau
e4c3ea9b60 bpf: Do not reject when the stack read size is different from the tracked scalar size
[ Upstream commit f30d4968e9aee737e174fc97942af46cfb49b484 ]

Below is a simplified case from a report in bcc [0]:

  r4 = 20
  *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r4
  *(u32 *)(r10 -8) = r4  /* r4 state is tracked */
  r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)  /* Read more than the tracked 32bit scalar.
			  * verifier rejects as 'corrupted spill memory'.
			  */

After commit 354e8f1970f8 ("bpf: Support <8-byte scalar spill and refill"),
the 8-byte aligned 32bit spill is also tracked by the verifier and the
register state is stored.

However, if 8 bytes are read from the stack instead of the tracked 4 byte
scalar, then verifier currently rejects the program as "corrupted spill
memory". This patch fixes this case by allowing it to read but marks the
register as unknown.

Also note that, if the prog is trying to corrupt/leak an earlier spilled
pointer by spilling another <8 bytes register on top, this has already
been rejected in the check_stack_write_fixed_off().

  [0] https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/pull/3683

Fixes: 354e8f1970f8 ("bpf: Support <8-byte scalar spill and refill")
Reported-by: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211102064535.316018-1-kafai@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-02-15 17:22:21 +01:00
Eduard Zingerman
36dbb8daf0 bpf: Fix to preserve reg parent/live fields when copying range info
[ Upstream commit 71f656a50176915d6813751188b5758daa8d012b ]

Register range information is copied in several places. The intent is
to transfer range/id information from one register/stack spill to
another. Currently this is done using direct register assignment, e.g.:

static void find_equal_scalars(..., struct bpf_reg_state *known_reg)
{
	...
	struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
	...
			*reg = *known_reg;
	...
}

However, such assignments also copy the following bpf_reg_state fields:

struct bpf_reg_state {
	...
	struct bpf_reg_state *parent;
	...
	enum bpf_reg_liveness live;
	...
};

Copying of these fields is accidental and incorrect, as could be
demonstrated by the following example:

     0: call ktime_get_ns()
     1: r6 = r0
     2: call ktime_get_ns()
     3: r7 = r0
     4: if r0 > r6 goto +1             ; r0 & r6 are unbound thus generated
                                       ; branch states are identical
     5: *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = 0xdeadbeef ; 64-bit write to fp[-8]
    --- checkpoint ---
     6: r1 = 42                        ; r1 marked as written
     7: *(u8 *)(r10 - 8) = r1          ; 8-bit write, fp[-8] parent & live
                                       ; overwritten
     8: r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8)
     9: r0 = 0
    10: exit

This example is unsafe because 64-bit write to fp[-8] at (5) is
conditional, thus not all bytes of fp[-8] are guaranteed to be set
when it is read at (8). However, currently the example passes
verification.

First, the execution path 1-10 is examined by verifier.
Suppose that a new checkpoint is created by is_state_visited() at (6).
After checkpoint creation:
- r1.parent points to checkpoint.r1,
- fp[-8].parent points to checkpoint.fp[-8].
At (6) the r1.live is set to REG_LIVE_WRITTEN.
At (7) the fp[-8].parent is set to r1.parent and fp[-8].live is set to
REG_LIVE_WRITTEN, because of the following code called in
check_stack_write_fixed_off():

static void save_register_state(struct bpf_func_state *state,
				int spi, struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
				int size)
{
	...
	state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr = *reg;  // <--- parent & live copied
	if (size == BPF_REG_SIZE)
		state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.live |= REG_LIVE_WRITTEN;
	...
}

Note the intent to mark stack spill as written only if 8 bytes are
spilled to a slot, however this intent is spoiled by a 'live' field copy.
At (8) the checkpoint.fp[-8] should be marked as REG_LIVE_READ but
this does not happen:
- fp[-8] in a current state is already marked as REG_LIVE_WRITTEN;
- fp[-8].parent points to checkpoint.r1, parentage chain is used by
  mark_reg_read() to mark checkpoint states.
At (10) the verification is finished for path 1-10 and jump 4-6 is
examined. The checkpoint.fp[-8] never gets REG_LIVE_READ mark and this
spill is pruned from the cached states by clean_live_states(). Hence
verifier state obtained via path 1-4,6 is deemed identical to one
obtained via path 1-6 and program marked as safe.

Note: the example should be executed with BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ flag
set to force creation of intermediate verifier states.

This commit revisits the locations where bpf_reg_state instances are
copied and replaces the direct copies with a call to a function
copy_register_state(dst, src) that preserves 'parent' and 'live'
fields of the 'dst'.

Fixes: 679c782de1 ("bpf/verifier: per-register parent pointers")
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230106142214.1040390-2-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-02-15 17:22:10 +01:00
Martin KaFai Lau
8de8c4a25e bpf: Support <8-byte scalar spill and refill
[ Upstream commit 354e8f1970f821d4952458f77b1ab6c3eb24d530 ]

The verifier currently does not save the reg state when
spilling <8byte bounded scalar to the stack.  The bpf program
will be incorrectly rejected when this scalar is refilled to
the reg and then used to offset into a packet header.
The later patch has a simplified bpf prog from a real use case
to demonstrate this case.  The current work around is
to reparse the packet again such that this offset scalar
is close to where the packet data will be accessed to
avoid the spill.  Thus, the header is parsed twice.

The llvm patch [1] will align the <8bytes spill to
the 8-byte stack address.  This can simplify the verifier
support by avoiding to store multiple reg states for
each 8 byte stack slot.

This patch changes the verifier to save the reg state when
spilling <8bytes scalar to the stack.  This reg state saving
is limited to spill aligned to the 8-byte stack address.
The current refill logic has already called coerce_reg_to_size(),
so coerce_reg_to_size() is not called on state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr
during spill.

When refilling in check_stack_read_fixed_off(),  it checks
the refill size is the same as the number of bytes marked with
STACK_SPILL before restoring the reg state.  When restoring
the reg state to state->regs[dst_regno], it needs
to avoid the state->regs[dst_regno].subreg_def being
over written because it has been marked by the check_reg_arg()
earlier [check_mem_access() is called after check_reg_arg() in
do_check()].  Reordering check_mem_access() and check_reg_arg()
will need a lot of changes in test_verifier's tests because
of the difference in verifier's error message.  Thus, the
patch here is to save the state->regs[dst_regno].subreg_def
first in check_stack_read_fixed_off().

There are cases that the verifier needs to scrub the spilled slot
from STACK_SPILL to STACK_MISC.  After this patch the spill is not always
in 8 bytes now, so it can no longer assume the other 7 bytes are always
marked as STACK_SPILL.  In particular, the scrub needs to avoid marking
an uninitialized byte from STACK_INVALID to STACK_MISC.  Otherwise, the
verifier will incorrectly accept bpf program reading uninitialized bytes
from the stack.  A new helper scrub_spilled_slot() is created for this
purpose.

[1]: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109073

Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210922004941.625398-1-kafai@fb.com
Stable-dep-of: 71f656a50176 ("bpf: Fix to preserve reg parent/live fields when copying range info")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-02-15 17:22:10 +01:00
Paul Chaignon
9ff2bebc2c bpf: Fix incorrect state pruning for <8B spill/fill
commit 345e004d023343d38088fdfea39688aa11e06ccf upstream.

Commit 354e8f1970f8 ("bpf: Support <8-byte scalar spill and refill")
introduced support in the verifier to track <8B spill/fills of scalars.
The backtracking logic for the precision bit was however skipping
spill/fills of less than 8B. That could cause state pruning to consider
two states equivalent when they shouldn't be.

As an example, consider the following bytecode snippet:

  0:  r7 = r1
  1:  call bpf_get_prandom_u32
  2:  r6 = 2
  3:  if r0 == 0 goto pc+1
  4:  r6 = 3
  ...
  8: [state pruning point]
  ...
  /* u32 spill/fill */
  10: *(u32 *)(r10 - 8) = r6
  11: r8 = *(u32 *)(r10 - 8)
  12: r0 = 0
  13: if r8 == 3 goto pc+1
  14: r0 = 1
  15: exit

The verifier first walks the path with R6=3. Given the support for <8B
spill/fills, at instruction 13, it knows the condition is true and skips
instruction 14. At that point, the backtracking logic kicks in but stops
at the fill instruction since it only propagates the precision bit for
8B spill/fill. When the verifier then walks the path with R6=2, it will
consider it safe at instruction 8 because R6 is not marked as needing
precision. Instruction 14 is thus never walked and is then incorrectly
removed as 'dead code'.

It's also possible to lead the verifier to accept e.g. an out-of-bound
memory access instead of causing an incorrect dead code elimination.

This regression was found via Cilium's bpf-next CI where it was causing
a conntrack map update to be silently skipped because the code had been
removed by the verifier.

This commit fixes it by enabling support for <8B spill/fills in the
bactracking logic. In case of a <8B spill/fill, the full 8B stack slot
will be marked as needing precision. Then, in __mark_chain_precision,
any tracked register spilled in a marked slot will itself be marked as
needing precision, regardless of the spill size. This logic makes two
assumptions: (1) only 8B-aligned spill/fill are tracked and (2) spilled
registers are only tracked if the spill and fill sizes are equal. Commit
ef979017b837 ("bpf: selftest: Add verifier tests for <8-byte scalar
spill and refill") covers the first assumption and the next commit in
this patchset covers the second.

Fixes: 354e8f1970f8 ("bpf: Support <8-byte scalar spill and refill")
Signed-off-by: Paul Chaignon <paul@isovalent.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2023-02-15 17:22:10 +01:00
Luis Gerhorst
da75dec7c6 bpf: Fix pointer-leak due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation
[ 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 979d63d50c ("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>
2023-02-01 08:23:11 +01:00
Andrii Nakryiko
e1989d808b bpf: propagate precision across all frames, not just the last one
[ Upstream commit 529409ea92d590659be487ba0839710329bd8074 ]

When equivalent completed state is found and it has additional precision
restrictions, BPF verifier propagates precision to
currently-being-verified state chain (i.e., including parent states) so
that if some of the states in the chain are not yet completed, necessary
precision restrictions are enforced.

Unfortunately, right now this happens only for the last frame (deepest
active subprogram's frame), not all the frames. This can lead to
incorrect matching of states due to missing precision marker. Currently
this doesn't seem possible as BPF verifier forces everything to precise
when validated BPF program has any subprograms. But with the next patch
lifting this restriction, this becomes problematic.

In fact, without this fix, we'll start getting failure in one of the
existing test_verifier test cases:

  #906/p precise: cross frame pruning FAIL
  Unexpected success to load!
  verification time 48 usec
  stack depth 0+0
  processed 26 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 3 total_states 17 peak_states 17 mark_read 8

This patch adds precision propagation across all frames.

Fixes: a3ce685dd0 ("bpf: fix precision tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221104163649.121784-3-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-01-14 10:15:27 +01:00
Martin KaFai Lau
cdd73a5ed0 bpf: Check the other end of slot_type for STACK_SPILL
[ Upstream commit 27113c59b6d0a587b29ae72d4ff3f832f58b0651 ]

Every 8 bytes of the stack is tracked by a bpf_stack_state.
Within each bpf_stack_state, there is a 'u8 slot_type[8]' to track
the type of each byte.  Verifier tests slot_type[0] == STACK_SPILL
to decide if the spilled reg state is saved.  Verifier currently only
saves the reg state if the whole 8 bytes are spilled to the stack,
so checking the slot_type[7] is the same as checking slot_type[0].

The later patch will allow verifier to save the bounded scalar
reg also for <8 bytes spill.  There is a llvm patch [1] to ensure
the <8 bytes spill will be 8-byte aligned,  so checking
slot_type[7] instead of slot_type[0] is required.

While at it, this patch refactors the slot_type[0] == STACK_SPILL
test into a new function is_spilled_reg() and change the
slot_type[0] check to slot_type[7] check in there also.

[1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D109073

Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210922004934.624194-1-kafai@fb.com
Stable-dep-of: 529409ea92d5 ("bpf: propagate precision across all frames, not just the last one")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-01-14 10:15:27 +01:00
Andrii Nakryiko
42b2b7382a bpf: propagate precision in ALU/ALU64 operations
[ 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: b5dc0163d8 ("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>
2023-01-14 10:15:27 +01:00
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
72e8d9c731 bpf: Fix slot type check in check_stack_write_var_off
[ Upstream commit f5e477a861e4a20d8a1c5f7a245f3a3c3c376b03 ]

For the case where allow_ptr_leaks is false, code is checking whether
slot type is STACK_INVALID and STACK_SPILL and rejecting other cases.
This is a consequence of incorrectly checking for register type instead
of the slot type (NOT_INIT and SCALAR_VALUE respectively). Fix the
check.

Fixes: 01f810ace9ed ("bpf: Allow variable-offset stack access")
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221103191013.1236066-5-memxor@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2023-01-14 10:15:27 +01:00
Youlin Li
cedd4f01f6 bpf: Fix wrong reg type conversion in release_reference()
[ Upstream commit f1db20814af532f85e091231223e5e4818e8464b ]

Some helper functions will allocate memory. To avoid memory leaks, the
verifier requires the eBPF program to release these memories by calling
the corresponding helper functions.

When a resource is released, all pointer registers corresponding to the
resource should be invalidated. The verifier use release_references() to
do this job, by apply  __mark_reg_unknown() to each relevant register.

It will give these registers the type of SCALAR_VALUE. A register that
will contain a pointer value at runtime, but of type SCALAR_VALUE, which
may allow the unprivileged user to get a kernel pointer by storing this
register into a map.

Using __mark_reg_not_init() while NOT allow_ptr_leaks can mitigate this
problem.

Fixes: fd978bf7fd ("bpf: Add reference tracking to verifier")
Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-1-liulin063@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2022-11-16 09:57:09 +01:00
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
9069db2579 bpf: Add helper macro bpf_for_each_reg_in_vstate
[ Upstream commit b239da34203f49c40b5d656220c39647c3ff0b3c ]

For a lot of use cases in future patches, we will want to modify the
state of registers part of some same 'group' (e.g. same ref_obj_id). It
won't just be limited to releasing reference state, but setting a type
flag dynamically based on certain actions, etc.

Hence, we need a way to easily pass a callback to the function that
iterates over all registers in current bpf_verifier_state in all frames
upto (and including) the curframe.

While in C++ we would be able to easily use a lambda to pass state and
the callback together, sadly we aren't using C++ in the kernel. The next
best thing to avoid defining a function for each case seems like
statement expressions in GNU C. The kernel already uses them heavily,
hence they can passed to the macro in the style of a lambda. The
statement expression will then be substituted in the for loop bodies.

Variables __state and __reg are set to current bpf_func_state and reg
for each invocation of the expression inside the passed in verifier
state.

Then, convert mark_ptr_or_null_regs, clear_all_pkt_pointers,
release_reference, find_good_pkt_pointers, find_equal_scalars to
use bpf_for_each_reg_in_vstate.

Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220904204145.3089-16-memxor@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Stable-dep-of: f1db20814af5 ("bpf: Fix wrong reg type conversion in release_reference()")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2022-11-16 09:57:09 +01:00
Alexei Starovoitov
95b6ec7337 bpf: Support for pointers beyond pkt_end.
[ Upstream commit 6d94e741a8ff818e5518da8257f5ca0aaed1f269 ]

This patch adds the verifier support to recognize inlined branch conditions.
The LLVM knows that the branch evaluates to the same value, but the verifier
couldn't track it. Hence causing valid programs to be rejected.
The potential LLVM workaround: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87428
can have undesired side effects, since LLVM doesn't know that
skb->data/data_end are being compared. LLVM has to introduce extra boolean
variable and use inline_asm trick to force easier for the verifier assembly.

Instead teach the verifier to recognize that
r1 = skb->data;
r1 += 10;
r2 = skb->data_end;
if (r1 > r2) {
  here r1 points beyond packet_end and
  subsequent
  if (r1 > r2) // always evaluates to "true".
}

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20201111031213.25109-2-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Stable-dep-of: f1db20814af5 ("bpf: Fix wrong reg type conversion in release_reference()")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2022-11-16 09:57:08 +01:00
Daniel Borkmann
e897980717 bpf: Don't use tnum_range on array range checking for poke descriptors
commit a657182a5c5150cdfacb6640aad1d2712571a409 upstream.

Hsin-Wei reported a KASAN splat triggered by their BPF runtime fuzzer which
is based on a customized syzkaller:

  BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in bpf_int_jit_compile+0x1257/0x13f0
  Read of size 8 at addr ffff888004e90b58 by task syz-executor.0/1489
  CPU: 1 PID: 1489 Comm: syz-executor.0 Not tainted 5.19.0 #1
  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
  1.13.0-1ubuntu1.1 04/01/2014
  Call Trace:
   <TASK>
   dump_stack_lvl+0x9c/0xc9
   print_address_description.constprop.0+0x1f/0x1f0
   ? bpf_int_jit_compile+0x1257/0x13f0
   kasan_report.cold+0xeb/0x197
   ? kvmalloc_node+0x170/0x200
   ? bpf_int_jit_compile+0x1257/0x13f0
   bpf_int_jit_compile+0x1257/0x13f0
   ? arch_prepare_bpf_dispatcher+0xd0/0xd0
   ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x43/0x70
   bpf_prog_select_runtime+0x3e8/0x640
   ? bpf_obj_name_cpy+0x149/0x1b0
   bpf_prog_load+0x102f/0x2220
   ? __bpf_prog_put.constprop.0+0x220/0x220
   ? find_held_lock+0x2c/0x110
   ? __might_fault+0xd6/0x180
   ? lock_downgrade+0x6e0/0x6e0
   ? lock_is_held_type+0xa6/0x120
   ? __might_fault+0x147/0x180
   __sys_bpf+0x137b/0x6070
   ? bpf_perf_link_attach+0x530/0x530
   ? new_sync_read+0x600/0x600
   ? __fget_files+0x255/0x450
   ? lock_downgrade+0x6e0/0x6e0
   ? fput+0x30/0x1a0
   ? ksys_write+0x1a8/0x260
   __x64_sys_bpf+0x7a/0xc0
   ? syscall_enter_from_user_mode+0x21/0x70
   do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
  RIP: 0033:0x7f917c4e2c2d

The problem here is that a range of tnum_range(0, map->max_entries - 1) has
limited ability to represent the concrete tight range with the tnum as the
set of resulting states from value + mask can result in a superset of the
actual intended range, and as such a tnum_in(range, reg->var_off) check may
yield true when it shouldn't, for example tnum_range(0, 2) would result in
00XX -> v = 0000, m = 0011 such that the intended set of {0, 1, 2} is here
represented by a less precise superset of {0, 1, 2, 3}. As the register is
known const scalar, really just use the concrete reg->var_off.value for the
upper index check.

Fixes: d2e4c1e6c2 ("bpf: Constant map key tracking for prog array pokes")
Reported-by: Hsin-Wei Hung <hsinweih@uci.edu>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/984b37f9fdf7ac36831d2137415a4a915744c1b6.1661462653.git.daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-08-31 17:15:24 +02:00
Alexei Starovoitov
7430e58764 bpf: Fix subprog names in stack traces.
[ Upstream commit 9c7c48d6a1e2eb5192ad5294c1c4dbd42a88e88b ]

The commit 7337224fc1 ("bpf: Improve the info.func_info and info.func_info_rec_size behavior")
accidently made bpf_prog_ksym_set_name() conservative for bpf subprograms.
Fixed it so instead of "bpf_prog_tag_F" the stack traces print "bpf_prog_tag_full_subprog_name".

Fixes: 7337224fc1 ("bpf: Improve the info.func_info and info.func_info_rec_size behavior")
Reported-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220714211637.17150-1-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2022-08-21 15:15:47 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
e917be1f83 bpf: Fix insufficient bounds propagation from adjust_scalar_min_max_vals
commit 3844d153a41adea718202c10ae91dc96b37453b5 upstream.

Kuee reported a corner case where the tnum becomes constant after the call
to __reg_bound_offset(), but the register's bounds are not, that is, its
min bounds are still not equal to the register's max bounds.

This in turn allows to leak pointers through turning a pointer register as
is into an unknown scalar via adjust_ptr_min_max_vals().

Before:

  func#0 @0
  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) R10=fp(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  0: (b7) r0 = 1                        ; R0_w=scalar(imm=1,umin=1,umax=1,var_off=(0x1; 0x0))
  1: (b7) r3 = 0                        ; R3_w=scalar(imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  2: (87) r3 = -r3                      ; R3_w=scalar()
  3: (87) r3 = -r3                      ; R3_w=scalar()
  4: (47) r3 |= 32767                   ; R3_w=scalar(smin=-9223372036854743041,umin=32767,var_off=(0x7fff; 0xffffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881)
  5: (75) if r3 s>= 0x0 goto pc+1       ; R3_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854808575,var_off=(0x8000000000007fff; 0x7fffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881,u32_min=32767)
  6: (95) exit

  from 5 to 7: R0=scalar(imm=1,umin=1,umax=1,var_off=(0x1; 0x0)) R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) R3=scalar(umin=32767,umax=9223372036854775807,var_off=(0x7fff; 0x7fffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881) R10=fp(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  7: (d5) if r3 s<= 0x8000 goto pc+1    ; R3=scalar(umin=32769,umax=9223372036854775807,var_off=(0x7fff; 0x7fffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881,u32_min=32767)
  8: (95) exit

  from 7 to 9: R0=scalar(imm=1,umin=1,umax=1,var_off=(0x1; 0x0)) R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) R3=scalar(umin=32767,umax=32768,var_off=(0x7fff; 0x8000)) R10=fp(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  9: (07) r3 += -32767                  ; R3_w=scalar(imm=0,umax=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))  <--- [*]
  10: (95) exit

What can be seen here is that R3=scalar(umin=32767,umax=32768,var_off=(0x7fff;
0x8000)) after the operation R3 += -32767 results in a 'malformed' constant, that
is, R3_w=scalar(imm=0,umax=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)). Intersecting with var_off has
not been done at that point via __update_reg_bounds(), which would have improved
the umax to be equal to umin.

Refactor the tnum <> min/max bounds information flow into a reg_bounds_sync()
helper and use it consistently everywhere. After the fix, bounds have been
corrected to R3_w=scalar(imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) and thus the register
is regarded as a 'proper' constant scalar of 0.

After:

  func#0 @0
  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) R10=fp(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  0: (b7) r0 = 1                        ; R0_w=scalar(imm=1,umin=1,umax=1,var_off=(0x1; 0x0))
  1: (b7) r3 = 0                        ; R3_w=scalar(imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  2: (87) r3 = -r3                      ; R3_w=scalar()
  3: (87) r3 = -r3                      ; R3_w=scalar()
  4: (47) r3 |= 32767                   ; R3_w=scalar(smin=-9223372036854743041,umin=32767,var_off=(0x7fff; 0xffffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881)
  5: (75) if r3 s>= 0x0 goto pc+1       ; R3_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854808575,var_off=(0x8000000000007fff; 0x7fffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881,u32_min=32767)
  6: (95) exit

  from 5 to 7: R0=scalar(imm=1,umin=1,umax=1,var_off=(0x1; 0x0)) R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) R3=scalar(umin=32767,umax=9223372036854775807,var_off=(0x7fff; 0x7fffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881) R10=fp(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  7: (d5) if r3 s<= 0x8000 goto pc+1    ; R3=scalar(umin=32769,umax=9223372036854775807,var_off=(0x7fff; 0x7fffffffffff8000),s32_min=-2147450881,u32_min=32767)
  8: (95) exit

  from 7 to 9: R0=scalar(imm=1,umin=1,umax=1,var_off=(0x1; 0x0)) R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0)) R3=scalar(umin=32767,umax=32768,var_off=(0x7fff; 0x8000)) R10=fp(off=0,imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))
  9: (07) r3 += -32767                  ; R3_w=scalar(imm=0,umax=0,var_off=(0x0; 0x0))  <--- [*]
  10: (95) exit

Fixes: b03c9f9fdc ("bpf/verifier: track signed and unsigned min/max values")
Reported-by: Kuee K1r0a <liulin063@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220701124727.11153-2-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-07-12 16:32:17 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
9adec73349 bpf: Fix incorrect verifier simulation around jmp32's jeq/jne
commit a12ca6277eca6aeeccf66e840c23a2b520e24c8f upstream.

Kuee reported a quirk in the jmp32's jeq/jne simulation, namely that the
register value does not match expectations for the fall-through path. For
example:

Before fix:

  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  0: (b7) r2 = 0                        ; R2_w=P0
  1: (b7) r6 = 563                      ; R6_w=P563
  2: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  3: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  4: (4c) w2 |= w6                      ; R2_w=Pscalar(umin=563,umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x233; 0xfffffdcc),s32_min=-2147483085) R6_w=P563
  5: (56) if w2 != 0x8 goto pc+1        ; R2_w=P571  <--- [*]
  6: (95) exit
  R0 !read_ok

After fix:

  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  0: (b7) r2 = 0                        ; R2_w=P0
  1: (b7) r6 = 563                      ; R6_w=P563
  2: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  3: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  4: (4c) w2 |= w6                      ; R2_w=Pscalar(umin=563,umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x233; 0xfffffdcc),s32_min=-2147483085) R6_w=P563
  5: (56) if w2 != 0x8 goto pc+1        ; R2_w=P8  <--- [*]
  6: (95) exit
  R0 !read_ok

As can be seen on line 5 for the branch fall-through path in R2 [*] is that
given condition w2 != 0x8 is false, verifier should conclude that r2 = 8 as
upper 32 bit are known to be zero. However, verifier incorrectly concludes
that r2 = 571 which is far off.

The problem is it only marks false{true}_reg as known in the switch for JE/NE
case, but at the end of the function, it uses {false,true}_{64,32}off to
update {false,true}_reg->var_off and they still hold the prior value of
{false,true}_reg->var_off before it got marked as known. The subsequent
__reg_combine_32_into_64() then propagates this old var_off and derives new
bounds. The information between min/max bounds on {false,true}_reg from
setting the register to known const combined with the {false,true}_reg->var_off
based on the old information then derives wrong register data.

Fix it by detangling the BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE cases and updating relevant
{false,true}_{64,32}off tnums along with the register marking to known
constant.

Fixes: 3f50f132d8 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Kuee K1r0a <liulin063@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220701124727.11153-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-07-12 16:32:17 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
342332fb0b bpf: Don't promote bogus looking registers after null check.
[ Upstream commit e60b0d12a95dcf16a63225cead4541567f5cb517 ]

If we ever get to a point again where we convert a bogus looking <ptr>_or_null
typed register containing a non-zero fixed or variable offset, then lets not
reset these bounds to zero since they are not and also don't promote the register
to a <ptr> type, but instead leave it as <ptr>_or_null. Converting to a unknown
register could be an avenue as well, but then if we run into this case it would
allow to leak a kernel pointer this way.

Fixes: f1174f77b5 ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2022-01-27 10:54:00 +01:00
Hou Tao
924886fa22 bpf: Disallow BPF_LOG_KERNEL log level for bpf(BPF_BTF_LOAD)
[ Upstream commit 866de407444398bc8140ea70de1dba5f91cc34ac ]

BPF_LOG_KERNEL is only used internally, so disallow bpf_btf_load()
to set log level as BPF_LOG_KERNEL. The same checking has already
been done in bpf_check(), so factor out a helper to check the
validity of log attributes and use it in both places.

Fixes: 8580ac9404 ("bpf: Process in-kernel BTF")
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211203053001.740945-1-houtao1@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2022-01-27 10:53:54 +01:00
Daniel Borkmann
35ab8c9085 bpf: Fix out of bounds access from invalid *_or_null type verification
[ no upstream commit given implicitly fixed through the larger refactoring
  in c25b2ae136039ffa820c26138ed4a5e5f3ab3841 ]

While auditing some other code, I noticed missing checks inside the pointer
arithmetic simulation, more specifically, adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(). Several
*_OR_NULL types are not rejected whereas they are _required_ to be rejected
given the expectation is that they get promoted into a 'real' pointer type
for the success case, that is, after an explicit != NULL check.

One case which stands out and is accessible from unprivileged (iff enabled
given disabled by default) is BPF ring buffer. From crafting a PoC, the NULL
check can be bypassed through an offset, and its id marking will then lead
to promotion of mem_or_null to a mem type.

bpf_ringbuf_reserve() helper can trigger this case through passing of reserved
flags, for example.

  func#0 @0
  0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
  1: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  1: (18) r1 = 0x0
  3: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  3: (b7) r2 = 8
  4: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP8 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  4: (b7) r3 = 0
  5: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP8 R3_w=invP0 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  5: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_reserve#131
  6: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  6: (bf) r6 = r0
  7: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  7: (07) r0 += 1
  8: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=1,imm=0) R6_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  8: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+4
   R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  9: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  9: (62) *(u32 *)(r6 +0) = 0
   R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  10: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  10: (bf) r1 = r6
  11: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R1_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  11: (b7) r2 = 0
  12: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R1_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP0 R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  12: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_submit#132
  13: R6=invP(id=0) R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm
  13: (b7) r0 = 0
  14: R0_w=invP0 R6=invP(id=0) R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm
  14: (95) exit

  from 8 to 13: safe
  processed 15 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 1 peak_states 1 mark_read 0
  OK

All three commits, that is b121b341e5 ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support"),
457f44363a ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it"), and the
afbf21dce6 ("bpf: Support readonly/readwrite buffers in verifier") suffer the same
cause and their *_OR_NULL type pendants must be rejected in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals().

Make the test more robust by reusing reg_type_may_be_null() helper such that we catch
all *_OR_NULL types we have today and in future.

Note that pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_BTF_ID, PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF, and PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF
is generally allowed.

Fixes: b121b341e5 ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support")
Fixes: 457f44363a ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it")
Fixes: afbf21dce6 ("bpf: Support readonly/readwrite buffers in verifier")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-01-16 09:14:22 +01:00
Daniel Borkmann
279e0bf80d bpf: Make 32->64 bounds propagation slightly more robust
commit e572ff80f05c33cd0cb4860f864f5c9c044280b6 upstream.

Make the bounds propagation in __reg_assign_32_into_64() slightly more
robust and readable by aligning it similarly as we did back in the
__reg_combine_64_into_32() counterpart. Meaning, only propagate or
pessimize them as a smin/smax pair.

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>
2021-12-22 09:30:50 +01:00
Daniel Borkmann
e2aad0b5f2 bpf: Fix signed bounds propagation after mov32
commit 3cf2b61eb06765e27fec6799292d9fb46d0b7e60 upstream.

For the case where both s32_{min,max}_value bounds are positive, the
__reg_assign_32_into_64() directly propagates them to their 64 bit
counterparts, otherwise it pessimises them into [0,u32_max] universe and
tries to refine them later on by learning through the tnum as per comment
in mentioned function. However, that does not always happen, for example,
in mov32 operation we call zext_32_to_64(dst_reg) which invokes the
__reg_assign_32_into_64() as is without subsequent bounds update as
elsewhere thus no refinement based on tnum takes place.

Thus, not calling into the __update_reg_bounds() / __reg_deduce_bounds() /
__reg_bound_offset() triplet as we do, for example, in case of ALU ops via
adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(), will lead to more pessimistic bounds when
dumping the full register state:

Before fix:

  0: (b4) w0 = -1
  1: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

  1: (bc) w0 = w0
  2: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

Technically, the smin_value=0 and smax_value=4294967295 bounds are not
incorrect, but given the register is still a constant, they break assumptions
about const scalars that smin_value == smax_value and umin_value == umax_value.

After fix:

  0: (b4) w0 = -1
  1: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

  1: (bc) w0 = w0
  2: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

Without the smin_value == smax_value and umin_value == umax_value invariant
being intact for const scalars, it is possible to leak out kernel pointers
from unprivileged user space if the latter is enabled. For example, when such
registers are involved in pointer arithmtics, then adjust_ptr_min_max_vals()
will taint the destination register into an unknown scalar, and the latter
can be exported and stored e.g. into a BPF map value.

Fixes: 3f50f132d8 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Kuee K1r0a <liulin063@gmail.com>
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>
2021-12-22 09:30:50 +01:00
Maxim Mikityanskiy
349e83c0cf bpf: Fix the off-by-two error in range markings
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: fb2a311a31 ("bpf: fix off by one for range markings with L{T, E} patterns")
Fixes: b37242c773 ("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>
2021-12-14 11:32:36 +01:00
Daniel Borkmann
33fe044f6a bpf: Fix toctou on read-only map's constant scalar tracking
commit 353050be4c19e102178ccc05988101887c25ae53 upstream.

Commit a23740ec43 ("bpf: Track contents of read-only maps as scalars") is
checking whether maps are read-only both from BPF program side and user space
side, and then, given their content is constant, reading out their data via
map->ops->map_direct_value_addr() which is then subsequently used as known
scalar value for the register, that is, it is marked as __mark_reg_known()
with the read value at verification time. Before a23740ec43, the register
content was marked as an unknown scalar so the verifier could not make any
assumptions about the map content.

The current implementation however is prone to a TOCTOU race, meaning, the
value read as known scalar for the register is not guaranteed to be exactly
the same at a later point when the program is executed, and as such, the
prior made assumptions of the verifier with regards to the program will be
invalid which can cause issues such as OOB access, etc.

While the BPF_F_RDONLY_PROG map flag is always fixed and required to be
specified at map creation time, the map->frozen property is initially set to
false for the map given the map value needs to be populated, e.g. for global
data sections. Once complete, the loader "freezes" the map from user space
such that no subsequent updates/deletes are possible anymore. For the rest
of the lifetime of the map, this freeze one-time trigger cannot be undone
anymore after a successful BPF_MAP_FREEZE cmd return. Meaning, any new BPF_*
cmd calls which would update/delete map entries will be rejected with -EPERM
since map_get_sys_perms() removes the FMODE_CAN_WRITE permission. This also
means that pending update/delete map entries must still complete before this
guarantee is given. This corner case is not an issue for loaders since they
create and prepare such program private map in successive steps.

However, a malicious user is able to trigger this TOCTOU race in two different
ways: i) via userfaultfd, and ii) via batched updates. For i) userfaultfd is
used to expand the competition interval, so that map_update_elem() can modify
the contents of the map after map_freeze() and bpf_prog_load() were executed.
This works, because userfaultfd halts the parallel thread which triggered a
map_update_elem() at the time where we copy key/value from the user buffer and
this already passed the FMODE_CAN_WRITE capability test given at that time the
map was not "frozen". Then, the main thread performs the map_freeze() and
bpf_prog_load(), and once that had completed successfully, the other thread
is woken up to complete the pending map_update_elem() which then changes the
map content. For ii) the idea of the batched update is similar, meaning, when
there are a large number of updates to be processed, it can increase the
competition interval between the two. It is therefore possible in practice to
modify the contents of the map after executing map_freeze() and bpf_prog_load().

One way to fix both i) and ii) at the same time is to expand the use of the
map's map->writecnt. The latter was introduced in fc9702273e ("bpf: Add mmap()
support for BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY") and further refined in 1f6cb19be2 ("bpf:
Prevent re-mmap()'ing BPF map as writable for initially r/o mapping") with
the rationale to make a writable mmap()'ing of a map mutually exclusive with
read-only freezing. The counter indicates writable mmap() mappings and then
prevents/fails the freeze operation. Its semantics can be expanded beyond
just mmap() by generally indicating ongoing write phases. This would essentially
span any parallel regular and batched flavor of update/delete operation and
then also have map_freeze() fail with -EBUSY. For the check_mem_access() in
the verifier we expand upon the bpf_map_is_rdonly() check ensuring that all
last pending writes have completed via bpf_map_write_active() test. Once the
map->frozen is set and bpf_map_write_active() indicates a map->writecnt of 0
only then we are really guaranteed to use the map's data as known constants.
For map->frozen being set and pending writes in process of still being completed
we fall back to marking that register as unknown scalar so we don't end up
making assumptions about it. With this, both TOCTOU reproducers from i) and
ii) are fixed.

Note that the map->writecnt has been converted into a atomic64 in the fix in
order to avoid a double freeze_mutex mutex_{un,}lock() pair when updating
map->writecnt in the various map update/delete BPF_* cmd flavors. Spanning
the freeze_mutex over entire map update/delete operations in syscall side
would not be possible due to then causing everything to be serialized.
Similarly, something like synchronize_rcu() after setting map->frozen to wait
for update/deletes to complete is not possible either since it would also
have to span the user copy which can sleep. On the libbpf side, this won't
break d66562fba1 ("libbpf: Add BPF object skeleton support") as the
anonymous mmap()-ed "map initialization image" is remapped as a BPF map-backed
mmap()-ed memory where for .rodata it's non-writable.

Fixes: a23740ec43 ("bpf: Track contents of read-only maps as scalars")
Reported-by: w1tcher.bupt@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[fix conflict to call bpf_map_write_active_dec() in err_put block.
fix conflict to insert new functions after find_and_alloc_map().]
Reference: CVE-2021-4001
Signed-off-by: Masami Ichikawa(CIP) <masami.ichikawa@cybertrust.co.jp>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2021-12-01 09:18:58 +01:00
Alexei Starovoitov
4a50bc0084 bpf: Fix propagation of signed bounds from 64-bit min/max into 32-bit.
[ Upstream commit 388e2c0b978339dee9b0a81a2e546f8979e021e2 ]

Similar to unsigned bounds propagation fix signed bounds.
The 'Fixes' tag is a hint. There is no security bug here.
The verifier was too conservative.

Fixes: 3f50f132d8 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211101222153.78759-2-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-11-18 14:04:13 +01:00
Alexei Starovoitov
84dde8c8c9 bpf: Fix propagation of bounds from 64-bit min/max into 32-bit and var_off.
[ Upstream commit b9979db8340154526d9ab38a1883d6f6ba9b6d47 ]

Before this fix:
166: (b5) if r2 <= 0x1 goto pc+22
from 166 to 189: R2=invP(id=1,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))

After this fix:
166: (b5) if r2 <= 0x1 goto pc+22
from 166 to 189: R2=invP(id=1,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1))

While processing BPF_JLE the reg_set_min_max() would set true_reg->umax_value = 1
and call __reg_combine_64_into_32(true_reg).

Without the fix it would not pass the condition:
if (__reg64_bound_u32(reg->umin_value) && __reg64_bound_u32(reg->umax_value))

since umin_value == 0 at this point.
Before commit 10bf4e83167c the umin was incorrectly ingored.
The commit 10bf4e83167c fixed the correctness issue, but pessimized
propagation of 64-bit min max into 32-bit min max and corresponding var_off.

Fixes: 10bf4e83167c ("bpf: Fix propagation of 32 bit unsigned bounds from 64 bit bounds")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211101222153.78759-1-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-11-18 14:04:13 +01:00
Bixuan Cui
6345a0bee8 bpf: Add oversize check before call kvcalloc()
[ 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>
2021-09-30 10:11:06 +02:00
Andrey Ignatov
b0491ab7d4 bpf: Fix possible out of bound write in narrow load handling
[ 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: 46f53a65d2 ("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>
2021-09-15 09:50:43 +02:00
He Fengqing
389dfd1147 bpf: Fix potential memleak and UAF in the verifier.
[ 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: 8041902dae ("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>
2021-09-15 09:50:31 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
9dd6f6d896 bpf: Fix ringbuf helper function compatibility
commit 5b029a32cfe4600f5e10e36b41778506b90fd4de upstream.

Commit 457f44363a ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support
for it") extended check_map_func_compatibility() by enforcing map -> helper
function match, but not helper -> map type match.

Due to this all of the bpf_ringbuf_*() helper functions could be used with
a wrong map type such as array or hash map, leading to invalid access due
to type confusion.

Also, both BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_{submit,discard} have ARG_PTR_TO_ALLOC_MEM as
argument and not a BPF map. Therefore, their check_map_func_compatibility()
presence is incorrect since it's only for map type checking.

Fixes: 457f44363a ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it")
Reported-by: Ryota Shiga (Flatt Security)
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2021-09-03 10:09:21 +02:00
Ilya Leoshkevich
585ff7344e bpf: Clear zext_dst of dead insns
[ 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. 5aa5bd14c5 ("bpf: add initial suite for selftests"), which
   introduced the test with the dead code.
2. 5327ed3d44 ("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: 5327ed3d44 ("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>
2021-08-26 08:35:43 -04:00
Daniel Borkmann
be561c0154 bpf: Fix pointer arithmetic mask tightening under state pruning
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>
2021-08-04 12:46:45 +02:00
Lorenz Bauer
ffb9d5c48b bpf: verifier: Allocate idmap scratch in verifier env
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>
2021-08-04 12:46:45 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
a11ca29c65 bpf: Remove superfluous aux sanitation on subprog rejection
commit 59089a189e3adde4cf85f2ce479738d1ae4c514d upstream.

Follow-up to fe9a5ca7e370 ("bpf: Do not mark insn as seen under speculative
path verification"). The sanitize_insn_aux_data() helper does not serve a
particular purpose in today's code. The original intention for the helper
was that if function-by-function verification fails, a given program would
be cleared from temporary insn_aux_data[], and then its verification would
be re-attempted in the context of the main program a second time.

However, a failure in do_check_subprogs() will skip do_check_main() and
propagate the error to the user instead, thus such situation can never occur.
Given its interaction is not compatible to the Spectre v1 mitigation (due to
comparing aux->seen with env->pass_cnt), just remove sanitize_insn_aux_data()
to avoid future bugs in this area.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2021-08-04 12:46:44 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
0e9280654a bpf: Fix leakage due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation
[ Upstream commit 2039f26f3aca5b0e419b98f65dd36481337b86ee ]

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.

af86ca4e30 ("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 af86ca4e30 /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 af86ca4e30 ("bpf:
Prevent memory disambiguation attack") is insufficient. Moreover, the detection
of stack reuse from af86ca4e30 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 af86ca4e30
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: af86ca4e30 ("bpf: Prevent memory disambiguation attack")
Fixes: f7cf25b202 ("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>
2021-08-04 12:46:44 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
39f1735c81 bpf: Fix tail_call_reachable rejection for interpreter when jit failed
[ Upstream commit 5dd0a6b8582ffbfa88351949d50eccd5b6694ade ]

During testing of f263a81451c1 ("bpf: Track subprog poke descriptors correctly
and fix use-after-free") under various failure conditions, for example, when
jit_subprogs() fails and tries to clean up the program to be run under the
interpreter, we ran into the following freeze:

  [...]
  #127/8 tailcall_bpf2bpf_3:FAIL
  [...]
  [   92.041251] BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run+0x1b9d/0x2e20
  [   92.042408] Read of size 8 at addr ffff88800da67f68 by task test_progs/682
  [   92.043707]
  [   92.044030] CPU: 1 PID: 682 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G   O   5.13.0-53301-ge6c08cb33a30-dirty #87
  [   92.045542] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.13.0-1ubuntu1 04/01/2014
  [   92.046785] Call Trace:
  [   92.047171]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args64+0xc0/0xc0
  [   92.047773]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args32+0x8b/0xb0
  [   92.048389]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args64+0xc0/0xc0
  [   92.049019]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [...] // few hundred [similar] lines more
  [   92.659025]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.659845]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args64+0xc0/0xc0
  [   92.660738]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args32+0x8b/0xb0
  [   92.661528]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args64+0xc0/0xc0
  [   92.662378]  ? print_usage_bug+0x50/0x50
  [   92.663221]  ? print_usage_bug+0x50/0x50
  [   92.664077]  ? bpf_ksym_find+0x9c/0xe0
  [   92.664887]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.665624]  ? kernel_text_address+0xf5/0x100
  [   92.666529]  ? __kernel_text_address+0xe/0x30
  [   92.667725]  ? unwind_get_return_address+0x2f/0x50
  [   92.668854]  ? ___bpf_prog_run+0x15d4/0x2e20
  [   92.670185]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.671130]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args64+0xc0/0xc0
  [   92.672020]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args32+0x8b/0xb0
  [   92.672860]  ? __bpf_prog_run_args64+0xc0/0xc0
  [   92.675159]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.677074]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xd5/0x130
  [   92.678662]  ? ___bpf_prog_run+0x15d4/0x2e20
  [   92.680046]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.681285]  ? __bpf_prog_run32+0x6b/0x90
  [   92.682601]  ? __bpf_prog_run64+0x90/0x90
  [   92.683636]  ? lock_downgrade+0x370/0x370
  [   92.684647]  ? mark_held_locks+0x44/0x90
  [   92.685652]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.686752]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x79/0x100
  [   92.688004]  ? ktime_get+0x117/0x130
  [   92.688573]  ? __cant_migrate+0x2b/0x80
  [   92.689192]  ? bpf_test_run+0x2f4/0x510
  [   92.689869]  ? bpf_test_timer_continue+0x1c0/0x1c0
  [   92.690856]  ? rcu_read_lock_bh_held+0x90/0x90
  [   92.691506]  ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x61/0x80
  [   92.692128]  ? eth_type_trans+0x128/0x240
  [   92.692737]  ? __build_skb+0x46/0x50
  [   92.693252]  ? bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x65e/0xc50
  [   92.693954]  ? bpf_prog_test_run_raw_tp+0x2d0/0x2d0
  [   92.694639]  ? __fget_light+0xa1/0x100
  [   92.695162]  ? bpf_prog_inc+0x23/0x30
  [   92.695685]  ? __sys_bpf+0xb40/0x2c80
  [   92.696324]  ? bpf_link_get_from_fd+0x90/0x90
  [   92.697150]  ? mark_held_locks+0x24/0x90
  [   92.698007]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x124/0x220
  [   92.699045]  ? finish_task_switch+0xe6/0x370
  [   92.700072]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x79/0x100
  [   92.701233]  ? finish_task_switch+0x11d/0x370
  [   92.702264]  ? __switch_to+0x2c0/0x740
  [   92.703148]  ? mark_held_locks+0x24/0x90
  [   92.704155]  ? __x64_sys_bpf+0x45/0x50
  [   92.705146]  ? do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
  [   92.706953]  ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
  [...]

Turns out that the program rejection from e411901c0b ("bpf: allow for tailcalls
in BPF subprograms for x64 JIT") is buggy since env->prog->aux->tail_call_reachable
is never true. Commit ebf7d1f508 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall
handling in JIT") added a tracker into check_max_stack_depth() which propagates
the tail_call_reachable condition throughout the subprograms. This info is then
assigned to the subprogram's func[i]->aux->tail_call_reachable. However, in the
case of the rejection check upon JIT failure, env->prog->aux->tail_call_reachable
is used. func[0]->aux->tail_call_reachable which represents the main program's
information did not propagate this to the outer env->prog->aux, though. Add this
propagation into check_max_stack_depth() where it needs to belong so that the
check can be done reliably.

Fixes: ebf7d1f508 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall handling in JIT")
Fixes: e411901c0b ("bpf: allow for tailcalls in BPF subprograms for x64 JIT")
Co-developed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/618c34e3163ad1a36b1e82377576a6081e182f25.1626123173.git.daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-07-28 14:35:37 +02:00
John Fastabend
a9f36bf361 bpf: Track subprog poke descriptors correctly and fix use-after-free
commit f263a81451c12da5a342d90572e317e611846f2c upstream.

Subprograms are calling map_poke_track(), but on program release there is no
hook to call map_poke_untrack(). However, on program release, the aux memory
(and poke descriptor table) is freed even though we still have a reference to
it in the element list of the map aux data. When we run map_poke_run(), we then
end up accessing free'd memory, triggering KASAN in prog_array_map_poke_run():

  [...]
  [  402.824689] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in prog_array_map_poke_run+0xc2/0x34e
  [  402.824698] Read of size 4 at addr ffff8881905a7940 by task hubble-fgs/4337
  [  402.824705] CPU: 1 PID: 4337 Comm: hubble-fgs Tainted: G          I       5.12.0+ #399
  [  402.824715] Call Trace:
  [  402.824719]  dump_stack+0x93/0xc2
  [  402.824727]  print_address_description.constprop.0+0x1a/0x140
  [  402.824736]  ? prog_array_map_poke_run+0xc2/0x34e
  [  402.824740]  ? prog_array_map_poke_run+0xc2/0x34e
  [  402.824744]  kasan_report.cold+0x7c/0xd8
  [  402.824752]  ? prog_array_map_poke_run+0xc2/0x34e
  [  402.824757]  prog_array_map_poke_run+0xc2/0x34e
  [  402.824765]  bpf_fd_array_map_update_elem+0x124/0x1a0
  [...]

The elements concerned are walked as follows:

    for (i = 0; i < elem->aux->size_poke_tab; i++) {
           poke = &elem->aux->poke_tab[i];
    [...]

The access to size_poke_tab is a 4 byte read, verified by checking offsets
in the KASAN dump:

  [  402.825004] The buggy address belongs to the object at ffff8881905a7800
                 which belongs to the cache kmalloc-1k of size 1024
  [  402.825008] The buggy address is located 320 bytes inside of
                 1024-byte region [ffff8881905a7800, ffff8881905a7c00)

The pahole output of bpf_prog_aux:

  struct bpf_prog_aux {
    [...]
    /* --- cacheline 5 boundary (320 bytes) --- */
    u32                        size_poke_tab;        /*   320     4 */
    [...]

In general, subprograms do not necessarily manage their own data structures.
For example, BTF func_info and linfo are just pointers to the main program
structure. This allows reference counting and cleanup to be done on the latter
which simplifies their management a bit. The aux->poke_tab struct, however,
did not follow this logic. The initial proposed fix for this use-after-free
bug further embedded poke data tracking into the subprogram with proper
reference counting. However, Daniel and Alexei questioned why we were treating
these objects special; I agree, its unnecessary. The fix here removes the per
subprogram poke table allocation and map tracking and instead simply points
the aux->poke_tab pointer at the main programs poke table. This way, map
tracking is simplified to the main program and we do not need to manage them
per subprogram.

This also means, bpf_prog_free_deferred(), which unwinds the program reference
counting and kfrees objects, needs to ensure that we don't try to double free
the poke_tab when free'ing the subprog structures. This is easily solved by
NULL'ing the poke_tab pointer. The second detail is to ensure that per
subprogram JIT logic only does fixups on poke_tab[] entries it owns. To do
this, we add a pointer in the poke structure to point at the subprogram value
so JITs can easily check while walking the poke_tab structure if the current
entry belongs to the current program. The aux pointer is stable and therefore
suitable for such comparison. On the jit_subprogs() error path, we omit
cleaning up the poke->aux field because these are only ever referenced from
the JIT side, but on error we will never make it to the JIT, so its fine to
leave them dangling. Removing these pointers would complicate the error path
for no reason. However, we do need to untrack all poke descriptors from the
main program as otherwise they could race with the freeing of JIT memory from
the subprograms. Lastly, a748c6975d ("bpf: propagate poke descriptors to
subprograms") had an off-by-one on the subprogram instruction index range
check as it was testing 'insn_idx >= subprog_start && insn_idx <= subprog_end'.
However, subprog_end is the next subprogram's start instruction.

Fixes: a748c6975d ("bpf: propagate poke descriptors to subprograms")
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210707223848.14580-2-john.fastabend@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2021-07-25 14:36:21 +02:00
John Fastabend
f97b9c4c07 bpf: Fix null ptr deref with mixed tail calls and subprogs
[ Upstream commit 7506d211b932870155bcb39e3dd9e39fab45a7c7 ]

The sub-programs prog->aux->poke_tab[] is populated in jit_subprogs() and
then used when emitting 'BPF_JMP|BPF_TAIL_CALL' insn->code from the
individual JITs. The poke_tab[] to use is stored in the insn->imm by
the code adding it to that array slot. The JIT then uses imm to find the
right entry for an individual instruction. In the x86 bpf_jit_comp.c
this is done by calling emit_bpf_tail_call_direct with the poke_tab[]
of the imm value.

However, we observed the below null-ptr-deref when mixing tail call
programs with subprog programs. For this to happen we just need to
mix bpf-2-bpf calls and tailcalls with some extra calls or instructions
that would be patched later by one of the fixup routines. So whats
happening?

Before the fixup_call_args() -- where the jit op is done -- various
code patching is done by do_misc_fixups(). This may increase the
insn count, for example when we patch map_lookup_up using map_gen_lookup
hook. This does two things. First, it means the instruction index,
insn_idx field, of a tail call instruction will move by a 'delta'.

In verifier code,

 struct bpf_jit_poke_descriptor desc = {
  .reason = BPF_POKE_REASON_TAIL_CALL,
  .tail_call.map = BPF_MAP_PTR(aux->map_ptr_state),
  .tail_call.key = bpf_map_key_immediate(aux),
  .insn_idx = i + delta,
 };

Then subprog start values subprog_info[i].start will be updated
with the delta and any poke descriptor index will also be updated
with the delta in adjust_poke_desc(). If we look at the adjust
subprog starts though we see its only adjusted when the delta
occurs before the new instructions,

        /* NOTE: fake 'exit' subprog should be updated as well. */
        for (i = 0; i <= env->subprog_cnt; i++) {
                if (env->subprog_info[i].start <= off)
                        continue;

Earlier subprograms are not changed because their start values
are not moved. But, adjust_poke_desc() does the offset + delta
indiscriminately. The result is poke descriptors are potentially
corrupted.

Then in jit_subprogs() we only populate the poke_tab[]
when the above insn_idx is less than the next subprogram start. From
above we corrupted our insn_idx so we might incorrectly assume a
poke descriptor is not used in a subprogram omitting it from the
subprogram. And finally when the jit runs it does the deref of poke_tab
when emitting the instruction and crashes with below. Because earlier
step omitted the poke descriptor.

The fix is straight forward with above context. Simply move same logic
from adjust_subprog_starts() into adjust_poke_descs() and only adjust
insn_idx when needed.

[   82.396354] bpf_testmod: version magic '5.12.0-rc2alu+ SMP preempt mod_unload ' should be '5.12.0+ SMP preempt mod_unload '
[   82.623001] loop10: detected capacity change from 0 to 8
[   88.487424] ==================================================================
[   88.487438] BUG: KASAN: null-ptr-deref in do_jit+0x184a/0x3290
[   88.487455] Write of size 8 at addr 0000000000000008 by task test_progs/5295
[   88.487471] CPU: 7 PID: 5295 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G          I       5.12.0+ #386
[   88.487483] Hardware name: Dell Inc. Precision 5820 Tower/002KVM, BIOS 1.9.2 01/24/2019
[   88.487490] Call Trace:
[   88.487498]  dump_stack+0x93/0xc2
[   88.487515]  kasan_report.cold+0x5f/0xd8
[   88.487530]  ? do_jit+0x184a/0x3290
[   88.487542]  do_jit+0x184a/0x3290
 ...
[   88.487709]  bpf_int_jit_compile+0x248/0x810
 ...
[   88.487765]  bpf_check+0x3718/0x5140
 ...
[   88.487920]  bpf_prog_load+0xa22/0xf10

Fixes: a748c6975d ("bpf: propagate poke descriptors to subprograms")
Reported-by: Jussi Maki <joamaki@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-07-14 16:56:26 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
8c82c52d1d bpf: Do not mark insn as seen under speculative path verification
[ Upstream commit fe9a5ca7e370e613a9a75a13008a3845ea759d6e ]

... 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>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-06-23 14:42:49 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
e9d271731d bpf: Inherit expanded/patched seen count from old aux data
[ Upstream commit d203b0fd863a2261e5d00b97f3d060c4c2a6db71 ]

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>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-06-23 14:42:49 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
5fc6ed1831 bpf: Fix leakage under speculation on mispredicted branches
[ Upstream commit 9183671af6dbf60a1219371d4ed73e23f43b49db ]

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: b2157399cc ("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>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-06-23 14:42:45 +02:00
Yinjun Zhang
24cb8bb7f6 bpf, offload: Reorder offload callback 'prepare' in verifier
[ Upstream commit ceb11679d9fcf3fdb358a310a38760fcbe9b63ed ]

Commit 4976b718c3 ("bpf: Introduce pseudo_btf_id") switched the
order of resolve_pseudo_ldimm(), in which some pseudo instructions
are rewritten. Thus those rewritten instructions cannot be passed
to driver via 'prepare' offload callback.

Reorder the 'prepare' offload callback to fix it.

Fixes: 4976b718c3 ("bpf: Introduce pseudo_btf_id")
Signed-off-by: Yinjun Zhang <yinjun.zhang@corigine.com>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210520085834.15023-1-simon.horman@netronome.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-06-03 09:00:49 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
27acfd11ba bpf: No need to simulate speculative domain for immediates
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>
2021-05-28 13:17:43 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
c87ef240a8 bpf: Fix mask direction swap upon off reg sign change
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>
2021-05-28 13:17:43 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
4e2c7b2974 bpf: Wrap aux data inside bpf_sanitize_info container
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>
2021-05-28 13:17:43 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
282bfc8848 bpf: Fix alu32 const subreg bound tracking on bitwise operations
commit 049c4e13714ecbca567b4d5f6d563f05d431c80e upstream.

Fix a bug in the verifier's scalar32_min_max_*() functions which leads to
incorrect tracking of 32 bit bounds for the simulation of and/or/xor bitops.
When both the src & dst subreg is a known constant, then the assumption is
that scalar_min_max_*() will take care to update bounds correctly. However,
this is not the case, for example, consider a register R2 which has a tnum
of 0xffffffff00000000, meaning, lower 32 bits are known constant and in this
case of value 0x00000001. R2 is then and'ed with a register R3 which is a
64 bit known constant, here, 0x100000002.

What can be seen in line '10:' is that 32 bit bounds reach an invalid state
where {u,s}32_min_value > {u,s}32_max_value. The reason is scalar32_min_max_*()
delegates 32 bit bounds updates to scalar_min_max_*(), however, that really
only takes place when both the 64 bit src & dst register is a known constant.
Given scalar32_min_max_*() is intended to be designed as closely as possible
to scalar_min_max_*(), update the 32 bit bounds in this situation through
__mark_reg32_known() which will set all {u,s}32_{min,max}_value to the correct
constant, which is 0x00000000 after the fix (given 0x00000001 & 0x00000002 in
32 bit space). This is possible given var32_off already holds the final value
as dst_reg->var_off is updated before calling scalar32_min_max_*().

Before fix, invalid tracking of R2:

  [...]
  9: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775807 (0x8000000000000001),smax_value=9223372032559808513 (0x7fffffff00000001),umin_value=1,umax_value=0xffffffff00000001,var_off=(0x1; 0xffffffff00000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=1,u32_min_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0
  9: (5f) r2 &= r3
  10: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967296 (0x100000000),umin_value=0,umax_value=0x100000000,var_off=(0x0; 0x100000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=0,u32_min_value=1,u32_max_value=0) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0
  [...]

After fix, correct tracking of R2:

  [...]
  9: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775807 (0x8000000000000001),smax_value=9223372032559808513 (0x7fffffff00000001),umin_value=1,umax_value=0xffffffff00000001,var_off=(0x1; 0xffffffff00000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=1,u32_min_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0
  9: (5f) r2 &= r3
  10: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967296 (0x100000000),umin_value=0,umax_value=0x100000000,var_off=(0x0; 0x100000000),s32_min_value=0,s32_max_value=0,u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=0) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0
  [...]

Fixes: 3f50f132d8 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Fixes: 2921c90d47 ("bpf: Fix a verifier failure with xor")
Reported-by: Manfred Paul (@_manfp)
Reported-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@canonical.com>
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>
2021-05-14 09:50:45 +02:00
Daniel Borkmann
4394be0a18 bpf: Fix propagation of 32 bit unsigned bounds from 64 bit bounds
[ Upstream commit 10bf4e83167cc68595b85fd73bb91e8f2c086e36 ]

Similarly as b02709587e ("bpf: Fix propagation of 32-bit signed bounds
from 64-bit bounds."), we also need to fix the propagation of 32 bit
unsigned bounds from 64 bit counterparts. That is, really only set the
u32_{min,max}_value when /both/ {umin,umax}_value safely fit in 32 bit
space. For example, the register with a umin_value == 1 does /not/ imply
that u32_min_value is also equal to 1, since umax_value could be much
larger than 32 bit subregister can hold, and thus u32_min_value is in
the interval [0,1] instead.

Before fix, invalid tracking result of R2_w=inv1:

  [...]
  5: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
  5: (35) if r2 >= 0x1 goto pc+1
  [...] // goto path
  7: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,umin_value=1) R10=fp0
  7: (b6) if w2 <= 0x1 goto pc+1
  [...] // goto path
  9: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775807,smax_value=9223372032559808513,umin_value=1,umax_value=18446744069414584321,var_off=(0x1; 0xffffffff00000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R10=fp0
  9: (bc) w2 = w2
  10: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv1 R10=fp0
  [...]

After fix, correct tracking result of R2_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1)):

  [...]
  5: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
  5: (35) if r2 >= 0x1 goto pc+1
  [...] // goto path
  7: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,umin_value=1) R10=fp0
  7: (b6) if w2 <= 0x1 goto pc+1
  [...] // goto path
  9: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,smax_value=9223372032559808513,umax_value=18446744069414584321,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff00000001),s32_min_value=0,s32_max_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R10=fp0
  9: (bc) w2 = w2
  10: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1)) R10=fp0
  [...]

Thus, same issue as in b02709587e holds for unsigned subregister tracking.
Also, align __reg64_bound_u32() similarly to __reg64_bound_s32() as done in
b02709587e to make them uniform again.

Fixes: 3f50f132d8 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Manfred Paul (@_manfp)
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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
2021-05-14 09:50:44 +02:00