linux-toradex.git/kernel/bpf/verifier.c, branch v4.4.124

bpf: fix incorrect sign extension in check_alu_op()

2018-03-22T08:23:32+00:00

commit 95a762e2c8c942780948091f8f2a4f32fce1ac6f upstream.

Distinguish between
BPF_ALU64|BPF_MOV|BPF_K (load 32-bit immediate, sign-extended to 64-bit)
and BPF_ALU|BPF_MOV|BPF_K (load 32-bit immediate, zero-padded to 64-bit);
only perform sign extension in the first case.

This patch differs from the mainline one because the verifier's internals
have changed in the meantime. Mainline tracks register values as 64-bit
values; however, 4.4 still stores tracked register values as 32-bit
values with sign extension. Therefore, in the case of a 32-bit op with
negative immediate, the value can't be tracked; leave the register as
UNKNOWN_VALUE (set by the preceding check_reg_arg() call).


I have manually tested this patch on top of 4.4.122. For the following BPF
bytecode:

        BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
        BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 1, 1),
        BPF_EXIT_INSN(),

        BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
        BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 1, 1),
        BPF_EXIT_INSN(),

        BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, -1),
        BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, -1, 1),
        BPF_EXIT_INSN(),

        BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, -1),
        BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, -1, 2),
        BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 42),
        BPF_EXIT_INSN(),

        BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 43),
        BPF_EXIT_INSN()

Verifier output on 4.4.122 without this patch:

0: (b7) r1 = 1
1: (15) if r1 == 0x1 goto pc+1
3: (b4) (u32) r1 = (u32) 1
4: (15) if r1 == 0x1 goto pc+1
6: (b7) r1 = -1
7: (15) if r1 == 0xffffffff goto pc+1
9: (b4) (u32) r1 = (u32) -1
10: (15) if r1 == 0xffffffff goto pc+2
13: (b4) (u32) r0 = (u32) 43
14: (95) exit

Verifier output on 4.4.122+ with this patch:

0: (b7) r1 = 1
1: (15) if r1 == 0x1 goto pc+1
3: (b4) (u32) r1 = (u32) 1
4: (15) if r1 == 0x1 goto pc+1
6: (b7) r1 = -1
7: (15) if r1 == 0xffffffff goto pc+1
9: (b4) (u32) r1 = (u32) -1
10: (15) if r1 == 0xffffffff goto pc+2
 R1=inv R10=fp
11: (b4) (u32) r0 = (u32) 42
12: (95) exit

from 10 to 13: R1=imm-1 R10=fp
13: (b4) (u32) r0 = (u32) 43
14: (95) exit


Signed-off-by: Jann Horn 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: reject stores into ctx via st and xadd

2018-02-03T16:04:25+00:00

[ upstream commit f37a8cb84cce18762e8f86a70bd6a49a66ab964c ]

Alexei found that verifier does not reject stores into context
via BPF_ST instead of BPF_STX. And while looking at it, we
also should not allow XADD variant of BPF_STX.

The context rewriter is only assuming either BPF_LDX_MEM- or
BPF_STX_MEM-type operations, thus reject anything other than
that so that assumptions in the rewriter properly hold. Add
test cases as well for BPF selftests.

Fixes: d691f9e8d440 ("bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields")
Reported-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: fix 32-bit divide by zero

2018-02-03T16:04:25+00:00

[ upstream commit 68fda450a7df51cff9e5a4d4a4d9d0d5f2589153 ]

due to some JITs doing if (src_reg == 0) check in 64-bit mode
for div/mod operations mask upper 32-bits of src register
before doing the check

Fixes: 622582786c9e ("net: filter: x86: internal BPF JIT")
Fixes: 7a12b5031c6b ("sparc64: Add eBPF JIT.")
Reported-by: syzbot+48340bb518e88849e2e3@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: arsh is not supported in 32 bit alu thus reject it

2018-02-03T16:04:24+00:00

[ upstream commit 7891a87efc7116590eaba57acc3c422487802c6f ]

The following snippet was throwing an 'unknown opcode cc' warning
in BPF interpreter:

  0: (18) r0 = 0x0
  2: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r0
  3: (cc) (u32) r0 s>>= (u32) r0
  4: (95) exit

Although a number of JITs do support BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_{K,X}
generation, not all of them do and interpreter does neither. We can
leave existing ones and implement it later in bpf-next for the
remaining ones, but reject this properly in verifier for the time
being.

Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Reported-by: syzbot+93c4904c5c70348a6890@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: fix branch pruning logic

2018-02-03T16:04:24+00:00

[ Upstream commit c131187db2d3fa2f8bf32fdf4e9a4ef805168467 ]

when the verifier detects that register contains a runtime constant
and it's compared with another constant it will prune exploration
of the branch that is guaranteed not to be taken at runtime.
This is all correct, but malicious program may be constructed
in such a way that it always has a constant comparison and
the other branch is never taken under any conditions.
In this case such path through the program will not be explored
by the verifier. It won't be taken at run-time either, but since
all instructions are JITed the malicious program may cause JITs
to complain about using reserved fields, etc.
To fix the issue we have to track the instructions explored by
the verifier and sanitize instructions that are dead at run time
with NOPs. We cannot reject such dead code, since llvm generates
it for valid C code, since it doesn't do as much data flow
analysis as the verifier does.

Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: prevent out-of-bounds speculation

2018-01-17T08:35:31+00:00

commit b2157399cc9898260d6031c5bfe45fe137c1fbe7 upstream.

Under speculation, CPUs may mis-predict branches in bounds checks. Thus,
memory accesses under a bounds check may be speculated even if the
bounds check fails, providing a primitive for building a side channel.

To avoid leaking kernel data round up array-based maps and mask the index
after bounds check, so speculated load with out of bounds index will load
either valid value from the array or zero from the padded area.

Unconditionally mask index for all array types even when max_entries
are not rounded to power of 2 for root user.
When map is created by unpriv user generate a sequence of bpf insns
that includes AND operation to make sure that JITed code includes
the same 'index & index_mask' operation.

If prog_array map is created by unpriv user replace
  bpf_tail_call(ctx, map, index);
with
  if (index >= max_entries) {
    index &= map->index_mask;
    bpf_tail_call(ctx, map, index);
  }
(along with roundup to power 2) to prevent out-of-bounds speculation.
There is secondary redundant 'if (index >= max_entries)' in the interpreter
and in all JITs, but they can be optimized later if necessary.

Other array-like maps (cpumap, devmap, sockmap, perf_event_array, cgroup_array)
cannot be used by unpriv, so no changes there.

That fixes bpf side of "Variant 1: bounds check bypass (CVE-2017-5753)" on
all architectures with and without JIT.

v2->v3:
Daniel noticed that attack potentially can be crafted via syscall commands
without loading the program, so add masking to those paths as well.

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: John Fastabend 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: adjust insn_aux_data when patching insns

2018-01-17T08:35:31+00:00

commit 8041902dae5299c1f194ba42d14383f734631009 upstream.

convert_ctx_accesses() replaces single bpf instruction with a set of
instructions. Adjust corresponding insn_aux_data while patching.
It's needed to make sure subsequent 'for(all insn)' loops
have matching insn and insn_aux_data.

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: refactor fixup_bpf_calls()

2018-01-17T08:35:30+00:00

commit 79741b3bdec01a8628368fbcfccc7d189ed606cb upstream.

reduce indent and make it iterate over instructions similar to
convert_ctx_accesses(). Also convert hard BUG_ON into soft verifier error.

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: move fixup_bpf_calls() function

2018-01-17T08:35:30+00:00

commit e245c5c6a5656e4d61aa7bb08e9694fd6e5b2b9d upstream.

no functional change.
move fixup_bpf_calls() to verifier.c
it's being refactored in the next patch

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: don't (ab)use instructions to store state

2018-01-17T08:35:30+00:00

commit 3df126f35f88dc76eea33769f85a3c3bb8ce6c6b upstream.

Storing state in reserved fields of instructions makes
it impossible to run verifier on programs already
marked as read-only. Allocate and use an array of
per-instruction state instead.

While touching the error path rename and move existing
jump target.

Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski 
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman