| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
[ 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 <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ 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 <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ 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 <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
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 <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
[ Backported to 4.9 - gregkh ]
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
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 <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
[Backported to 4.9.y - gregkh]
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
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 <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
[backported to 4.9 - gregkh]
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
An UNKNOWN_VALUE is not supposed to be derived from a pointer, unless
pointer leaks are allowed. Therefore, states_equal() must not treat
a state with a pointer in a register as "equal" to a state with an
UNKNOWN_VALUE in that register.
This was fixed differently upstream, but the code around here was
largely rewritten in 4.14 by commit f1174f77b50c "bpf/verifier: rework
value tracking". The bug can be detected by the bpf/verifier sub-test
"pointer/scalar confusion in state equality check (way 1)".
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
|
|
From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
[ Upstream commit 95a762e2c8c942780948091f8f2a4f32fce1ac6f ]
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.
Starting with v4.14, this is exploitable by unprivileged users as long as
the unprivileged_bpf_disabled sysctl isn't set.
Debian assigned CVE-2017-16995 for this issue.
v3:
- add CVE number (Ben Hutchings)
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Reject programs that compute wildly out-of-bounds stack pointers.
Otherwise, pointers can be computed with an offset that doesn't fit into an
`int`, causing security issues in the stack memory access check (as well as
signed integer overflow during offset addition).
This is a fix specifically for the v4.9 stable tree because the mainline
code looks very different at this point.
Fixes: 7bca0a9702edf ("bpf: enhance verifier to understand stack pointer arithmetic")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
[ 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 <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
[ Upstream commit 8041902dae5299c1f194ba42d14383f734631009 ]
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 <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit e67b8a685c7c984e834e3181ef4619cd7025a136 ]
Neither ___bpf_prog_run nor the JITs accept it.
Also adds a new test case.
Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 9305706c2e808ae59f1eb201867f82f1ddf6d7a6 ]
We have to subtract the src max from the dst min, and vice-versa, since
(e.g.) the smallest result comes from the largest subtrahend.
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 4cabc5b186b5427b9ee5a7495172542af105f02b ]
Edward reported that there's an issue in min/max value bounds
tracking when signed and unsigned compares both provide hints
on limits when having unknown variables. E.g. a program such
as the following should have been rejected:
0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
1: (bf) r2 = r10
2: (07) r2 += -8
3: (18) r1 = 0xffff8a94cda93400
5: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
6: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+7
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
7: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = -8
8: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
9: (b7) r2 = -1
10: (2d) if r1 > r2 goto pc+3
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=inv,min_value=0
R2=imm-1,max_value=18446744073709551615,min_align=1 R10=fp
11: (65) if r1 s> 0x1 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=inv,min_value=0,max_value=1
R2=imm-1,max_value=18446744073709551615,min_align=1 R10=fp
12: (0f) r0 += r1
13: (72) *(u8 *)(r0 +0) = 0
R0=map_value_adj(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=1 R1=inv,min_value=0,max_value=1
R2=imm-1,max_value=18446744073709551615,min_align=1 R10=fp
14: (b7) r0 = 0
15: (95) exit
What happens is that in the first part ...
8: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
9: (b7) r2 = -1
10: (2d) if r1 > r2 goto pc+3
... r1 carries an unsigned value, and is compared as unsigned
against a register carrying an immediate. Verifier deduces in
reg_set_min_max() that since the compare is unsigned and operation
is greater than (>), that in the fall-through/false case, r1's
minimum bound must be 0 and maximum bound must be r2. Latter is
larger than the bound and thus max value is reset back to being
'invalid' aka BPF_REGISTER_MAX_RANGE. Thus, r1 state is now
'R1=inv,min_value=0'. The subsequent test ...
11: (65) if r1 s> 0x1 goto pc+2
... is a signed compare of r1 with immediate value 1. Here,
verifier deduces in reg_set_min_max() that since the compare
is signed this time and operation is greater than (>), that
in the fall-through/false case, we can deduce that r1's maximum
bound must be 1, meaning with prior test, we result in r1 having
the following state: R1=inv,min_value=0,max_value=1. Given that
the actual value this holds is -8, the bounds are wrongly deduced.
When this is being added to r0 which holds the map_value(_adj)
type, then subsequent store access in above case will go through
check_mem_access() which invokes check_map_access_adj(), that
will then probe whether the map memory is in bounds based
on the min_value and max_value as well as access size since
the actual unknown value is min_value <= x <= max_value; commit
fce366a9dd0d ("bpf, verifier: fix alu ops against map_value{,
_adj} register types") provides some more explanation on the
semantics.
It's worth to note in this context that in the current code,
min_value and max_value tracking are used for two things, i)
dynamic map value access via check_map_access_adj() and since
commit 06c1c049721a ("bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory")
ii) also enforced at check_helper_mem_access() when passing a
memory address (pointer to packet, map value, stack) and length
pair to a helper and the length in this case is an unknown value
defining an access range through min_value/max_value in that
case. The min_value/max_value tracking is /not/ used in the
direct packet access case to track ranges. However, the issue
also affects case ii), for example, the following crafted program
based on the same principle must be rejected as well:
0: (b7) r2 = 0
1: (bf) r3 = r10
2: (07) r3 += -512
3: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = -8
4: (79) r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
5: (b7) r6 = -1
6: (2d) if r4 > r6 goto pc+5
R1=ctx R2=imm0,min_value=0,max_value=0,min_align=2147483648 R3=fp-512
R4=inv,min_value=0 R6=imm-1,max_value=18446744073709551615,min_align=1 R10=fp
7: (65) if r4 s> 0x1 goto pc+4
R1=ctx R2=imm0,min_value=0,max_value=0,min_align=2147483648 R3=fp-512
R4=inv,min_value=0,max_value=1 R6=imm-1,max_value=18446744073709551615,min_align=1
R10=fp
8: (07) r4 += 1
9: (b7) r5 = 0
10: (6a) *(u16 *)(r10 -512) = 0
11: (85) call bpf_skb_load_bytes#26
12: (b7) r0 = 0
13: (95) exit
Meaning, while we initialize the max_value stack slot that the
verifier thinks we access in the [1,2] range, in reality we
pass -7 as length which is interpreted as u32 in the helper.
Thus, this issue is relevant also for the case of helper ranges.
Resetting both bounds in check_reg_overflow() in case only one
of them exceeds limits is also not enough as similar test can be
created that uses values which are within range, thus also here
learned min value in r1 is incorrect when mixed with later signed
test to create a range:
0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
1: (bf) r2 = r10
2: (07) r2 += -8
3: (18) r1 = 0xffff880ad081fa00
5: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
6: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+7
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
7: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = -8
8: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
9: (b7) r2 = 2
10: (3d) if r2 >= r1 goto pc+3
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=inv,min_value=3
R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R10=fp
11: (65) if r1 s> 0x4 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0
R1=inv,min_value=3,max_value=4 R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R10=fp
12: (0f) r0 += r1
13: (72) *(u8 *)(r0 +0) = 0
R0=map_value_adj(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=3,max_value=4
R1=inv,min_value=3,max_value=4 R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R10=fp
14: (b7) r0 = 0
15: (95) exit
This leaves us with two options for fixing this: i) to invalidate
all prior learned information once we switch signed context, ii)
to track min/max signed and unsigned boundaries separately as
done in [0]. (Given latter introduces major changes throughout
the whole verifier, it's rather net-next material, thus this
patch follows option i), meaning we can derive bounds either
from only signed tests or only unsigned tests.) There is still the
case of adjust_reg_min_max_vals(), where we adjust bounds on ALU
operations, meaning programs like the following where boundaries
on the reg get mixed in context later on when bounds are merged
on the dst reg must get rejected, too:
0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
1: (bf) r2 = r10
2: (07) r2 += -8
3: (18) r1 = 0xffff89b2bf87ce00
5: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
6: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+6
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
7: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = -8
8: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)
9: (b7) r2 = 2
10: (3d) if r2 >= r1 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=inv,min_value=3
R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R10=fp
11: (b7) r7 = 1
12: (65) if r7 s> 0x0 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=inv,min_value=3
R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R7=imm1,max_value=0 R10=fp
13: (b7) r0 = 0
14: (95) exit
from 12 to 15: R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0
R1=inv,min_value=3 R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R7=imm1,min_value=1 R10=fp
15: (0f) r7 += r1
16: (65) if r7 s> 0x4 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=inv,min_value=3
R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R7=inv,min_value=4,max_value=4 R10=fp
17: (0f) r0 += r7
18: (72) *(u8 *)(r0 +0) = 0
R0=map_value_adj(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=4,max_value=4 R1=inv,min_value=3
R2=imm2,min_value=2,max_value=2,min_align=2 R7=inv,min_value=4,max_value=4 R10=fp
19: (b7) r0 = 0
20: (95) exit
Meaning, in adjust_reg_min_max_vals() we must also reset range
values on the dst when src/dst registers have mixed signed/
unsigned derived min/max value bounds with one unbounded value
as otherwise they can be added together deducing false boundaries.
Once both boundaries are established from either ALU ops or
compare operations w/o mixing signed/unsigned insns, then they
can safely be added to other regs also having both boundaries
established. Adding regs with one unbounded side to a map value
where the bounded side has been learned w/o mixing ops is
possible, but the resulting map value won't recover from that,
meaning such op is considered invalid on the time of actual
access. Invalid bounds are set on the dst reg in case i) src reg,
or ii) in case dst reg already had them. The only way to recover
would be to perform i) ALU ops but only 'add' is allowed on map
value types or ii) comparisons, but these are disallowed on
pointers in case they span a range. This is fine as only BPF_JEQ
and BPF_JNE may be performed on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers
which potentially turn them into PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE type depending
on the branch, so only here min/max value cannot be invalidated
for them.
In terms of state pruning, value_from_signed is considered
as well in states_equal() when dealing with adjusted map values.
With regards to breaking existing programs, there is a small
risk, but use-cases are rather quite narrow where this could
occur and mixing compares probably unlikely.
Joint work with Josef and Edward.
[0] https://lists.iovisor.org/pipermail/iovisor-dev/2017-June/000822.html
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Reported-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit fce366a9dd0ddc47e7ce05611c266e8574a45116 ]
While looking into map_value_adj, I noticed that alu operations
directly on the map_value() resp. map_value_adj() register (any
alu operation on a map_value() register will turn it into a
map_value_adj() typed register) are not sufficiently protected
against some of the operations. Two non-exhaustive examples are
provided that the verifier needs to reject:
i) BPF_AND on r0 (map_value_adj):
0: (bf) r2 = r10
1: (07) r2 += -8
2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r2 +0) = 0
3: (18) r1 = 0xbf842a00
5: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
6: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=48,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
7: (57) r0 &= 8
8: (7a) *(u64 *)(r0 +0) = 22
R0=map_value_adj(ks=8,vs=48,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=8 R10=fp
9: (95) exit
from 6 to 9: R0=inv,min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
9: (95) exit
processed 10 insns
ii) BPF_ADD in 32 bit mode on r0 (map_value_adj):
0: (bf) r2 = r10
1: (07) r2 += -8
2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r2 +0) = 0
3: (18) r1 = 0xc24eee00
5: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
6: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+2
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=48,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
7: (04) (u32) r0 += (u32) 0
8: (7a) *(u64 *)(r0 +0) = 22
R0=map_value_adj(ks=8,vs=48,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
9: (95) exit
from 6 to 9: R0=inv,min_value=0,max_value=0 R10=fp
9: (95) exit
processed 10 insns
Issue is, while min_value / max_value boundaries for the access
are adjusted appropriately, we change the pointer value in a way
that cannot be sufficiently tracked anymore from its origin.
Operations like BPF_{AND,OR,DIV,MUL,etc} on a destination register
that is PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE{,_ADJ} was probably unintended, in fact,
all the test cases coming with 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access
into map value arrays") perform BPF_ADD only on the destination
register that is PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ.
Only for UNKNOWN_VALUE register types such operations make sense,
f.e. with unknown memory content fetched initially from a constant
offset from the map value memory into a register. That register is
then later tested against lower / upper bounds, so that the verifier
can then do the tracking of min_value / max_value, and properly
check once that UNKNOWN_VALUE register is added to the destination
register with type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE{,_ADJ}. This is also what the
original use-case is solving. Note, tracking on what is being
added is done through adjust_reg_min_max_vals() and later access
to the map value enforced with these boundaries and the given offset
from the insn through check_map_access_adj().
Tests will fail for non-root environment due to prohibited pointer
arithmetic, in particular in check_alu_op(), we bail out on the
is_pointer_value() check on the dst_reg (which is false in root
case as we allow for pointer arithmetic via env->allow_ptr_leaks).
Similarly to PTR_TO_PACKET, one way to fix it is to restrict the
allowed operations on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE{,_ADJ} registers to 64 bit
mode BPF_ADD. The test_verifier suite runs fine after the patch
and it also rejects mentioned test cases.
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 3c2ce60bdd3d57051bf85615deec04a694473840 ]
Current limits with regards to processing program paths do not
really reflect today's needs anymore due to programs becoming
more complex and verifier smarter, keeping track of more data
such as const ALU operations, alignment tracking, spilling of
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ registers, and other features allowing for
smarter matching of what LLVM generates.
This also comes with the side-effect that we result in fewer
opportunities to prune search states and thus often need to do
more work to prove safety than in the past due to different
register states and stack layout where we mismatch. Generally,
it's quite hard to determine what caused a sudden increase in
complexity, it could be caused by something as trivial as a
single branch somewhere at the beginning of the program where
LLVM assigned a stack slot that is marked differently throughout
other branches and thus causing a mismatch, where verifier
then needs to prove safety for the whole rest of the program.
Subsequently, programs with even less than half the insn size
limit can get rejected. We noticed that while some programs
load fine under pre 4.11, they get rejected due to hitting
limits on more recent kernels. We saw that in the vast majority
of cases (90+%) pruning failed due to register mismatches. In
case of stack mismatches, majority of cases failed due to
different stack slot types (invalid, spill, misc) rather than
differences in spilled registers.
This patch makes pruning more aggressive by also adding markers
that sit at conditional jumps as well. Currently, we only mark
jump targets for pruning. For example in direct packet access,
these are usually error paths where we bail out. We found that
adding these markers, it can reduce number of processed insns
by up to 30%. Another option is to ignore reg->id in probing
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers, which can help pruning
slightly as well by up to 7% observed complexity reduction as
stand-alone. Meaning, if a previous path with register type
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL for map X was found to be safe, then
in the current state a PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL register for
the same map X must be safe as well. Last but not least the
patch also adds a scheduling point and bumps the current limit
for instructions to be processed to a more adequate value.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 43188702b3d98d2792969a3377a30957f05695e6 ]
Currently the verifier does not track imm across alu operations when
the source register is of unknown type. This adds additional pattern
matching to catch this and track imm. We've seen LLVM generating this
pattern while working on cilium.
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
commit 6bdf6abc56b53103324dfd270a86580306e1a232 upstream.
Leaking kernel addresses on unpriviledged is generally disallowed,
for example, verifier rejects the following:
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: (18) r2 = 0xffff897e82304400
3: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +48) = r2
R2 leaks addr into ctx
Doing pointer arithmetic on them is also forbidden, so that they
don't turn into unknown value and then get leaked out. However,
there's xadd as a special case, where we don't check the src reg
for being a pointer register, e.g. the following will pass:
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +48) = r0
2: (18) r2 = 0xffff897e82304400 ; map
4: (db) lock *(u64 *)(r1 +48) += r2
5: (95) exit
We could store the pointer into skb->cb, loose the type context,
and then read it out from there again to leak it eventually out
of a map value. Or more easily in a different variant, too:
0: (bf) r6 = r1
1: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
2: (bf) r2 = r10
3: (07) r2 += -8
4: (18) r1 = 0x0
6: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
7: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+3
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R6=ctx R10=fp
8: (b7) r3 = 0
9: (7b) *(u64 *)(r0 +0) = r3
10: (db) lock *(u64 *)(r0 +0) += r6
11: (b7) r0 = 0
12: (95) exit
from 7 to 11: R0=inv,min_value=0,max_value=0 R6=ctx R10=fp
11: (b7) r0 = 0
12: (95) exit
Prevent this by checking xadd src reg for pointer types. Also
add a couple of test cases related to this.
Fixes: 1be7f75d1668 ("bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs")
Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 0d0e57697f162da4aa218b5feafe614fb666db07 ]
The patch fixes two things at once:
1) It checks the env->allow_ptr_leaks and only prints the map address to
the log if we have the privileges to do so, otherwise it just dumps 0
as we would when kptr_restrict is enabled on %pK. Given the latter is
off by default and not every distro sets it, I don't want to rely on
this, hence the 0 by default for unprivileged.
2) Printing of ldimm64 in the verifier log is currently broken in that
we don't print the full immediate, but only the 32 bit part of the
first insn part for ldimm64. Thus, fix this up as well; it's okay to
access, since we verified all ldimm64 earlier already (including just
constants) through replace_map_fd_with_map_ptr().
Fixes: 1be7f75d1668 ("bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs")
Fixes: cbd357008604 ("bpf: verifier (add ability to receive verification log)")
Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 332270fdc8b6fba07d059a9ad44df9e1a2ad4529 ]
llvm 4.0 and above generates the code like below:
....
440: (b7) r1 = 15
441: (05) goto pc+73
515: (79) r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 -152)
516: (bf) r7 = r10
517: (07) r7 += -112
518: (bf) r2 = r7
519: (0f) r2 += r1
520: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r8 +0)
521: (73) *(u8 *)(r2 +45) = r1
....
and the verifier complains "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'" for insn #521.
This is because verifier marks register r2 as unknown value after #519
where r2 is a stack pointer and r1 holds a constant value.
Teach verifier to recognize "stack_ptr + imm" and
"stack_ptr + reg with const val" as valid stack_ptr with new offset.
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit b1977682a3858b5584ffea7cfb7bd863f68db18d ]
llvm can optimize the 'if (ptr > data_end)' checks to be in the order
slightly different than the original C code which will confuse verifier.
Like:
if (ptr + 16 > data_end)
return TC_ACT_SHOT;
// may be followed by
if (ptr + 14 > data_end)
return TC_ACT_SHOT;
while llvm can see that 'ptr' is valid for all 16 bytes,
the verifier could not.
Fix verifier logic to account for such case and add a test.
Reported-by: Huapeng Zhou <hzhou@fb.com>
Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 6760bf2ddde8ad64f8205a651223a93de3a35494 ]
Martin reported a verifier issue that hit the BUG_ON() for his
test case in the mark_reg_unknown_value() function:
[ 202.861380] kernel BUG at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:467!
[...]
[ 203.291109] Call Trace:
[ 203.296501] [<ffffffff811364d5>] mark_map_reg+0x45/0x50
[ 203.308225] [<ffffffff81136558>] mark_map_regs+0x78/0x90
[ 203.320140] [<ffffffff8113938d>] do_check+0x226d/0x2c90
[ 203.331865] [<ffffffff8113a6ab>] bpf_check+0x48b/0x780
[ 203.343403] [<ffffffff81134c8e>] bpf_prog_load+0x27e/0x440
[ 203.355705] [<ffffffff8118a38f>] ? handle_mm_fault+0x11af/0x1230
[ 203.369158] [<ffffffff812d8188>] ? security_capable+0x48/0x60
[ 203.382035] [<ffffffff811351a4>] SyS_bpf+0x124/0x960
[ 203.393185] [<ffffffff810515f6>] ? __do_page_fault+0x276/0x490
[ 203.406258] [<ffffffff816db320>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x13/0x94
This issue got uncovered after the fix in a08dd0da5307 ("bpf: fix
regression on verifier pruning wrt map lookups"). The reason why it
wasn't noticed before was, because as mentioned in a08dd0da5307,
mark_map_regs() was doing the id matching incorrectly based on the
uncached regs[regno].id. So, in the first loop, we walked all regs
and as soon as we found regno == i, then this reg's id was cleared
when calling mark_reg_unknown_value() thus that every subsequent
register was probed against id of 0 (which, in combination with the
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL type is an invalid condition that no other
register state can hold), and therefore wasn't type transitioned such
as in the spilled register case for the second loop.
Now since that got fixed, it turned out that 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf:
Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers") used
mark_reg_unknown_value() incorrectly for the spilled regs, and thus
hitting the BUG_ON() in some cases due to regno >= MAX_BPF_REG.
Although spilled regs have the same type as the non-spilled regs
for the verifier state, that is, struct bpf_reg_state, they are
semantically different from the non-spilled regs. In other words,
there can be up to 64 (MAX_BPF_STACK / BPF_REG_SIZE) spilled regs
in the stack, for example, register R<x> could have been spilled by
the program to stack location X, Y, Z, and in mark_map_regs() we
need to scan these stack slots of type STACK_SPILL for potential
registers that we have to transition from PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL.
Therefore, depending on the location, the spilled_regs regno can
be a lot higher than just MAX_BPF_REG's value since we operate on
stack instead. The reset in mark_reg_unknown_value() itself is
just fine, only that the BUG_ON() was inappropriate for this. Fix
it by making a __mark_reg_unknown_value() version that can be
called from mark_map_reg() generically; we know for the non-spilled
case that the regno is always < MAX_BPF_REG anyway.
Fixes: 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers")
Reported-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit a08dd0da5307ba01295c8383923e51e7997c3576 ]
Commit 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL
registers") introduced a regression where existing programs stopped
loading due to reaching the verifier's maximum complexity limit,
whereas prior to this commit they were loading just fine; the affected
program has roughly 2k instructions.
What was found is that state pruning couldn't be performed effectively
anymore due to mismatches of the verifier's register state, in particular
in the id tracking. It doesn't mean that 57a09bf0a416 is incorrect per
se, but rather that verifier needs to perform a lot more work for the
same program with regards to involved map lookups.
Since commit 57a09bf0a416 is only about tracking registers with type
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL, the id is only needed to follow registers
until they are promoted through pattern matching with a NULL check to
either PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE or UNKNOWN_VALUE type. After that point, the
id becomes irrelevant for the transitioned types.
For UNKNOWN_VALUE, id is already reset to 0 via mark_reg_unknown_value(),
but not so for PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE where id is becoming stale. It's even
transferred further into other types that don't make use of it. Among
others, one example is where UNKNOWN_VALUE is set on function call
return with RET_INTEGER return type.
states_equal() will then fall through the memcmp() on register state;
note that the second memcmp() uses offsetofend(), so the id is part of
that since d2a4dd37f6b4 ("bpf: fix state equivalence"). But the bisect
pointed already to 57a09bf0a416, where we really reach beyond complexity
limit. What I found was that states_equal() often failed in this
case due to id mismatches in spilled regs with registers in type
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE. Unlike non-spilled regs, spilled regs just perform
a memcmp() on their reg state and don't have any other optimizations
in place, therefore also id was relevant in this case for making a
pruning decision.
We can safely reset id to 0 as well when converting to PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE.
For the affected program, it resulted in a ~17 fold reduction of
complexity and let the program load fine again. Selftest suite also
runs fine. The only other place where env->id_gen is used currently is
through direct packet access, but for these cases id is long living, thus
a different scenario.
Also, the current logic in mark_map_regs() is not fully correct when
marking NULL branch with UNKNOWN_VALUE. We need to cache the destination
reg's id in any case. Otherwise, once we marked that reg as UNKNOWN_VALUE,
it's id is reset and any subsequent registers that hold the original id
and are of type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL won't be marked UNKNOWN_VALUE
anymore, since mark_map_reg() reuses the uncached regs[regno].id that
was just overridden. Note, we don't need to cache it outside of
mark_map_regs(), since it's called once on this_branch and the other
time on other_branch, which are both two independent verifier states.
A test case for this is added here, too.
Fixes: 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit d2a4dd37f6b41fbcad76efbf63124eb3126c66fe ]
Commmits 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers")
and 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays") by themselves
are correct, but in combination they make state equivalence ignore 'id' field
of the register state which can lead to accepting invalid program.
Fixes: 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers")
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
[ Upstream commit 57a09bf0a416700676e77102c28f9cfcb48267e0 ]
A BPF program is required to check the return register of a
map_elem_lookup() call before accessing memory. The verifier keeps
track of this by converting the type of the result register from
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL to PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE after a conditional
jump ensures safety. This check is currently exclusively performed
for the result register 0.
In the event the compiler reorders instructions, BPF_MOV64_REG
instructions may be moved before the conditional jump which causes
them to keep their type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL to which the
verifier objects when the register is accessed:
0: (b7) r1 = 10
1: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1
2: (bf) r2 = r10
3: (07) r2 += -8
4: (18) r1 = 0x59c00000
6: (85) call 1
7: (bf) r4 = r0
8: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8) R4=map_value_or_null(ks=8,vs=8) R10=fp
9: (7a) *(u64 *)(r4 +0) = 0
R4 invalid mem access 'map_value_or_null'
This commit extends the verifier to keep track of all identical
PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers after a map_elem_lookup() by
assigning them an ID and then marking them all when the conditional
jump is observed.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
If we have a branch that looks something like this
int foo = map->value;
if (condition) {
foo += blah;
} else {
foo = bar;
}
map->array[foo] = baz;
We will incorrectly assume that the !condition branch is equal to the condition
branch as the register for foo will be UNKNOWN_VALUE in both cases. We need to
adjust this logic to only do this if we didn't do a varlen access after we
processed the !condition branch, otherwise we have different ranges and need to
check the other branch as well.
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
I made some invalid assumptions with BPF_AND and BPF_MOD that could result in
invalid accesses to bpf map entries. Fix this up by doing a few things
1) Kill BPF_MOD support. This doesn't actually get used by the compiler in real
life and just adds extra complexity.
2) Fix the logic for BPF_AND, don't allow AND of negative numbers and set the
minimum value to 0 for positive AND's.
3) Don't do operations on the ranges if they are set to the limits, as they are
by definition undefined, and allowing arithmetic operations on those values
could make them appear valid when they really aren't.
This fixes the testcase provided by Jann as well as a few other theoretical
problems.
Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this
struct foo {
unsigned iter;
int array[SOME_CONSTANT];
};
You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of
foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't
go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start
for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum
value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we
try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that
region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as
this
unsigned index = 0;
if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT)
foo->iter = index;
else
index = foo->iter++;
foo->array[index] = bar;
would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and
SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra
check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %=
SOME_CONSTANT.
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
This prevent future potential pointer leaks when an unprivileged eBPF
program will read a pointer value from its context. Even if
is_valid_access() returns a pointer type, the eBPF verifier replace it
with UNKNOWN_VALUE. The register value that contains a kernel address is
then allowed to leak. Moreover, this fix allows unprivileged eBPF
programs to use functions with (legitimate) pointer arguments.
Not an issue currently since reg_type is only set for PTR_TO_PACKET or
PTR_TO_PACKET_END in XDP and TC programs that can only be loaded as
privileged. For now, the only unprivileged eBPF program allowed is for
socket filtering and all the types from its context are UNKNOWN_VALUE.
However, this fix is important for future unprivileged eBPF programs
which could use pointers in their context.
Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
When running as parser interpret BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW
instructions as loading CONST_IMM with the value stored
in imm. The verifier will continue not recognizing those
due to concerns about search space/program complexity
increase.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Advanced JIT compilers and translators may want to use
eBPF verifier as a base for parsers or to perform custom
checks and validations.
Add ability for external users to invoke the verifier
and provide callbacks to be invoked for every intruction
checked. For now only add most basic callback for
per-instruction pre-interpretation checks is added. More
advanced users may also like to have per-instruction post
callback and state comparison callback.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Move verifier's internal structures to a header file and
prefix their names with bpf_ to avoid potential namespace
conflicts. Those structures will soon be used by external
analyzers.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
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 <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
This work implements direct packet access for helpers and direct packet
write in a similar fashion as already available for XDP types via commits
4acf6c0b84c9 ("bpf: enable direct packet data write for xdp progs") and
6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"), and as a
complementary feature to the already available direct packet read for tc
(cls/act) programs.
For enabling this, we need to introduce two helpers, bpf_skb_pull_data()
and bpf_csum_update(). The first is generally needed for both, read and
write, because they would otherwise only be limited to the current linear
skb head. Usually, when the data_end test fails, programs just bail out,
or, in the direct read case, use bpf_skb_load_bytes() as an alternative
to overcome this limitation. If such data sits in non-linear parts, we
can just pull them in once with the new helper, retest and eventually
access them.
At the same time, this also makes sure the skb is uncloned, which is, of
course, a necessary condition for direct write. As this needs to be an
invariant for the write part only, the verifier detects writes and adds
a prologue that is calling bpf_skb_pull_data() to effectively unclone the
skb from the very beginning in case it is indeed cloned. The heuristic
makes use of a similar trick that was done in 233577a22089 ("net: filter:
constify detection of pkt_type_offset"). This comes at zero cost for other
programs that do not use the direct write feature. Should a program use
this feature only sparsely and has read access for the most parts with,
for example, drop return codes, then such write action can be delegated
to a tail called program for mitigating this cost of potential uncloning
to a late point in time where it would have been paid similarly with the
bpf_skb_store_bytes() as well. Advantage of direct write is that the
writes are inlined whereas the helper cannot make any length assumptions
and thus needs to generate a call to memcpy() also for small sizes, as well
as cost of helper call itself with sanity checks are avoided. Plus, when
direct read is already used, we don't need to cache or perform rechecks
on the data boundaries (due to verifier invalidating previous checks for
helpers that change skb->data), so more complex programs using rewrites
can benefit from switching to direct read plus write.
For direct packet access to helpers, we save the otherwise needed copy into
a temp struct sitting on stack memory when use-case allows. Both facilities
are enabled via may_access_direct_pkt_data() in verifier. For now, we limit
this to map helpers and csum_diff, and can successively enable other helpers
where we find it makes sense. Helpers that definitely cannot be allowed for
this are those part of bpf_helper_changes_skb_data() since they can change
underlying data, and those that write into memory as this could happen for
packet typed args when still cloned. bpf_csum_update() helper accommodates
for the fact that we need to fixup checksum_complete when using direct write
instead of bpf_skb_store_bytes(), meaning the programs can use available
helpers like bpf_csum_diff(), and implement csum_add(), csum_sub(),
csum_block_add(), csum_block_sub() equivalents in eBPF together with the
new helper. A usage example will be provided for iproute2's examples/bpf/
directory.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Current contract for the following two helper argument types is:
* ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE: passed argument pair must be (ptr, >0).
* ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO: passed argument pair can be either
(NULL, 0) or (ptr, >0).
With 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"), we can
pass also raw packet data to helpers, so depending on the argument type
being PTR_TO_PACKET, we now either assert memory via check_packet_access()
or check_stack_boundary(). As a result, the tests in check_packet_access()
currently allow more than intended with regards to reg->imm.
Back in 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access"), check_packet_access()
was fine to ignore size argument since in check_mem_access() size was
bpf_size_to_bytes() derived and prior to the call to check_packet_access()
guaranteed to be larger than zero.
However, for the above two argument types, it currently means, we can have
a <= 0 size and thus breaking current guarantees for helpers. Enforce a
check for size <= 0 and bail out if so.
check_stack_boundary() doesn't have such an issue since it already tests
for access_size <= 0 and bails out, resp. access_size == 0 in case of NULL
pointer passed when allowed.
Fixes: 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
LLVM can generate code that tests for direct packet access via
skb->data/data_end in a way that currently gets rejected by the
verifier, example:
[...]
7: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80)
8: (61) r9 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76)
9: (bf) r2 = r9
10: (07) r2 += 54
11: (3d) if r3 >= r2 goto pc+12
R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx
R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp
12: (18) r4 = 0xffffff7a
14: (05) goto pc+430
[...]
from 11 to 24: R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv
R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp
24: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r1
25: (b7) r1 = 0
26: (63) *(u32 *)(r6 +56) = r1
27: (b7) r2 = 40
28: (71) r8 = *(u8 *)(r9 +20)
invalid access to packet, off=20 size=1, R9(id=0,off=0,r=0)
The reason why this gets rejected despite a proper test is that we
currently call find_good_pkt_pointers() only in case where we detect
tests like rX > pkt_end, where rX is of type pkt(id=Y,off=Z,r=0) and
derived, for example, from a register of type pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=0)
pointing to skb->data. find_good_pkt_pointers() then fills the range
in the current branch to pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=Z) on success.
For above case, we need to extend that to recognize pkt_end >= rX
pattern and mark the other branch that is taken on success with the
appropriate pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=Z) type via find_good_pkt_pointers().
Since eBPF operates on BPF_JGT (>) and BPF_JGE (>=), these are the
only two practical options to test for from what LLVM could have
generated, since there's no such thing as BPF_JLT (<) or BPF_JLE (<=)
that we would need to take into account as well.
After the fix:
[...]
7: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80)
8: (61) r9 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76)
9: (bf) r2 = r9
10: (07) r2 += 54
11: (3d) if r3 >= r2 goto pc+12
R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx
R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp
12: (18) r4 = 0xffffff7a
14: (05) goto pc+430
[...]
from 11 to 24: R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=54) R3=pkt_end R4=inv
R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=54) R10=fp
24: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r1
25: (b7) r1 = 0
26: (63) *(u32 *)(r6 +56) = r1
27: (b7) r2 = 40
28: (71) r8 = *(u8 *)(r9 +20)
29: (bf) r1 = r8
30: (25) if r8 > 0x3c goto pc+47
R1=inv56 R2=imm40 R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R8=inv56
R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=54) R10=fp
31: (b7) r1 = 1
[...]
Verifier test cases are also added in this work, one that demonstrates
the mentioned example here and one that tries a bad packet access for
the current/fall-through branch (the one with types pkt(id=X,off=Y,r=0),
pkt(id=X,off=0,r=0)), then a case with good and bad accesses, and two
with both test variants (>, >=).
Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Make sure that BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT programs only use
preallocated hash maps, since doing memory allocation
in overflow_handler can crash depending on where nmi got triggered.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The verifier supported only 4-byte metafields in
struct __sk_buff and struct xdp_md. The metafields in upcoming
struct bpf_perf_event are 8-byte to match register width in struct pt_regs.
Teach verifier to recognize 8-byte metafield access.
The patch doesn't affect safety of sockets and xdp programs.
They check for 4-byte only ctx access before these conditions are hit.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Minor overlapping changes for both merge conflicts.
Resolution work done by Stephen Rothwell was used
as a reference.
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The helper functions like bpf_map_lookup_elem(map, key) were only
allowing 'key' to point to the initialized stack area.
That is causing performance degradation when programs need to process
millions of packets per second and need to copy contents of the packet
into the stack just to pass the stack pointer into the lookup() function.
Allow such helpers read from the packet directly.
All helpers that expect ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE,
ARG_PTR_TO_STACK assume byte aligned pointer, so no alignment concerns,
only need to check that helper will not be accessing beyond
the packet range verified by the prior 'if (ptr < data_end)' condition.
For now allow this feature for XDP programs only. Later it can be
relaxed for the clsact programs as well.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
While hashing out BPF's current_task_under_cgroup helper bits, it came
to discussion that the skb_in_cgroup helper name was suboptimally chosen.
Tejun says:
So, I think in_cgroup should mean that the object is in that
particular cgroup while under_cgroup in the subhierarchy of that
cgroup. Let's rename the other subhierarchy test to under too. I
think that'd be a lot less confusing going forward.
[...]
It's more intuitive and gives us the room to implement the real
"in" test if ever necessary in the future.
Since this touches uapi bits, we need to change this as long as v4.8
is not yet officially released. Thus, change the helper enum and rename
related bits.
Fixes: 4a482f34afcc ("cgroup: bpf: Add bpf_skb_in_cgroup_proto")
Reference: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/658500/
Suggested-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>
Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
|
|
This adds a bpf helper that's similar to the skb_in_cgroup helper to check
whether the probe is currently executing in the context of a specific
subset of the cgroupsv2 hierarchy. It does this based on membership test
for a cgroup arraymap. It is invalid to call this in an interrupt, and
it'll return an error. The helper is primarily to be used in debugging
activities for containers, where you may have multiple programs running in
a given top-level "container".
Signed-off-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Using per-register incrementing ID can lead to
find_good_pkt_pointers() confusing registers which
have completely different values. Consider example:
0: (bf) r6 = r1
1: (61) r8 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76)
2: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80)
3: (bf) r7 = r8
4: (07) r8 += 32
5: (2d) if r8 > r0 goto pc+9
R0=pkt_end R1=ctx R6=ctx R7=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=32) R8=pkt(id=0,off=32,r=32) R10=fp
6: (bf) r8 = r7
7: (bf) r9 = r7
8: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r7 +0)
9: (0f) r8 += r1
10: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r7 +1)
11: (0f) r9 += r1
12: (07) r8 += 32
13: (2d) if r8 > r0 goto pc+1
R0=pkt_end R1=inv56 R6=ctx R7=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=32) R8=pkt(id=1,off=32,r=32) R9=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=32) R10=fp
14: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r9 +16)
15: (b7) r7 = 0
16: (bf) r0 = r7
17: (95) exit
We need to get a UNKNOWN_VALUE with imm to force id
generation so lines 0-5 make r7 a valid packet pointer.
We then read two different bytes from the packet and
add them to copies of the constructed packet pointer.
r8 (line 9) and r9 (line 11) will get the same id of 1,
independently. When either of them is validated (line
13) - find_good_pkt_pointers() will also mark the other
as safe. This leads to access on line 14 being mistakenly
considered safe.
Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
For forwarding to be effective, XDP programs should be allowed to
rewrite packet data.
This requires that the drivers supporting XDP must all map the packet
memory as TODEVICE or BIDIRECTIONAL before invoking the program.
Signed-off-by: Brenden Blanco <bblanco@plumgrid.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Add a new bpf prog type that is intended to run in early stages of the
packet rx path. Only minimal packet metadata will be available, hence a
new context type, struct xdp_md, is exposed to userspace. So far only
expose the packet start and end pointers, and only in read mode.
An XDP program must return one of the well known enum values, all other
return codes are reserved for future use. Unfortunately, this
restriction is hard to enforce at verification time, so take the
approach of warning at runtime when such programs are encountered. Out
of bounds return codes should alias to XDP_ABORTED.
Signed-off-by: Brenden Blanco <bblanco@plumgrid.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Adds a bpf helper, bpf_skb_in_cgroup, to decide if a skb->sk
belongs to a descendant of a cgroup2. It is similar to the
feature added in netfilter:
commit c38c4597e4bf ("netfilter: implement xt_cgroup cgroup2 path match")
The user is expected to populate a BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_ARRAY
which will be used by the bpf_skb_in_cgroup.
Modifications to the bpf verifier is to ensure BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_ARRAY
and bpf_skb_in_cgroup() are always used together.
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Add a BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_ARRAY and its bpf_map_ops's implementations.
To update an element, the caller is expected to obtain a cgroup2 backed
fd by open(cgroup2_dir) and then update the array with that fd.
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The ctx structure passed into bpf programs is different depending on bpf
program type. The verifier incorrectly marked ctx->data and ctx->data_end
access based on ctx offset only. That caused loads in tracing programs
int bpf_prog(struct pt_regs *ctx) { .. ctx->ax .. }
to be incorrectly marked as PTR_TO_PACKET which later caused verifier
to reject the program that was actually valid in tracing context.
Fix this by doing program type specific matching of ctx offsets.
Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access")
Reported-by: Sasha Goldshtein <goldshtn@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Humans don't write C code like:
u8 *ptr = skb->data;
int imm = 4;
imm += ptr;
but from llvm backend point of view 'imm' and 'ptr' are registers and
imm += ptr may be preferred vs ptr += imm depending which register value
will be used further in the code, while verifier can only recognize ptr += imm.
That caused small unrelated changes in the C code of the bpf program to
trigger rejection by the verifier. Therefore teach the verifier to recognize
both ptr += imm and imm += ptr.
For example:
when R6=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=62) R7=imm22
after r7 += r6 instruction
will be R6=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=62) R7=pkt(id=0,off=22,r=62)
Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
when packet headers are accessed in 'decreasing' order (like TCP port
may be fetched before the program reads IP src) the llvm may generate
the following code:
[...] // R7=pkt(id=0,off=22,r=70)
r2 = *(u32 *)(r7 +0) // good access
[...]
r7 += 40 // R7=pkt(id=0,off=62,r=70)
r8 = *(u32 *)(r7 +0) // good access
[...]
r1 = *(u32 *)(r7 -20) // this one will fail though it's within a safe range
// it's doing *(u32*)(skb->data + 42)
Fix verifier to recognize such code pattern
Alos turned out that 'off > range' condition is not a verifier bug.
It's a buggy program that may do something like:
if (ptr + 50 > data_end)
return 0;
ptr += 60;
*(u32*)ptr;
in such case emit
"invalid access to packet, off=0 size=4, R1(id=0,off=60,r=50)" error message,
so all information is available for the program author to fix the program.
Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
