<feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'>
<title>linux-stable.git/kernel/bpf/verifier.c, branch v4.13.2</title>
<subtitle>Linux kernel stable tree</subtitle>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/'/>
<entry>
<title>bpf/verifier: fix min/max handling in BPF_SUB</title>
<updated>2017-07-24T21:02:55+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Edward Cree</name>
<email>ecree@solarflare.com</email>
</author>
<published>2017-07-21T13:37:34+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=9305706c2e808ae59f1eb201867f82f1ddf6d7a6'/>
<id>9305706c2e808ae59f1eb201867f82f1ddf6d7a6</id>
<content type='text'>
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 &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
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 &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: fix mixed signed/unsigned derived min/max value bounds</title>
<updated>2017-07-20T22:20:27+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Daniel Borkmann</name>
<email>daniel@iogearbox.net</email>
</author>
<published>2017-07-20T22:00:21+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=4cabc5b186b5427b9ee5a7495172542af105f02b'/>
<id>4cabc5b186b5427b9ee5a7495172542af105f02b</id>
<content type='text'>
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 &gt; 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&gt; 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 &gt; 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 (&gt;), 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&gt; 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 (&gt;), 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 &lt;= x &lt;= 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 &gt; 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&gt; 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 &gt;= 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&gt; 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 &gt;= 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&gt; 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&gt; 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 &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik &lt;jbacik@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
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 &gt; 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&gt; 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 &gt; 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 (&gt;), 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&gt; 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 (&gt;), 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 &lt;= x &lt;= 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 &gt; 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&gt; 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 &gt;= 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&gt; 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 &gt;= 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&gt; 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&gt; 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 &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik &lt;jbacik@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf, verifier: add additional patterns to evaluate_reg_imm_alu</title>
<updated>2017-07-03T09:22:52+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>John Fastabend</name>
<email>john.fastabend@gmail.com</email>
</author>
<published>2017-07-02T00:13:30+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=43188702b3d98d2792969a3377a30957f05695e6'/>
<id>43188702b3d98d2792969a3377a30957f05695e6</id>
<content type='text'>
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 &lt;john.fastabend@gmail.com&gt;
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
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 &lt;john.fastabend@gmail.com&gt;
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: simplify narrower ctx access</title>
<updated>2017-07-03T09:22:52+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Daniel Borkmann</name>
<email>daniel@iogearbox.net</email>
</author>
<published>2017-07-02T00:13:27+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=f96da09473b52c09125cc9bf7d7d4576ae8229e0'/>
<id>f96da09473b52c09125cc9bf7d7d4576ae8229e0</id>
<content type='text'>
This work tries to make the semantics and code around the
narrower ctx access a bit easier to follow. Right now
everything is done inside the .is_valid_access(). Offset
matching is done differently for read/write types, meaning
writes don't support narrower access and thus matching only
on offsetof(struct foo, bar) is enough whereas for read
case that supports narrower access we must check for
offsetof(struct foo, bar) + offsetof(struct foo, bar) +
sizeof(&lt;bar&gt;) - 1 for each of the cases. For read cases of
individual members that don't support narrower access (like
packet pointers or skb-&gt;cb[] case which has its own narrow
access logic), we check as usual only offsetof(struct foo,
bar) like in write case. Then, for the case where narrower
access is allowed, we also need to set the aux info for the
access. Meaning, ctx_field_size and converted_op_size have
to be set. First is the original field size e.g. sizeof(&lt;bar&gt;)
as in above example from the user facing ctx, and latter
one is the target size after actual rewrite happened, thus
for the kernel facing ctx. Also here we need the range match
and we need to keep track changing convert_ctx_access() and
converted_op_size from is_valid_access() as both are not at
the same location.

We can simplify the code a bit: check_ctx_access() becomes
simpler in that we only store ctx_field_size as a meta data
and later in convert_ctx_accesses() we fetch the target_size
right from the location where we do convert. Should the verifier
be misconfigured we do reject for BPF_WRITE cases or target_size
that are not provided. For the subsystems, we always work on
ranges in is_valid_access() and add small helpers for ranges
and narrow access, convert_ctx_accesses() sets target_size
for the relevant instruction.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: John Fastabend &lt;john.fastabend@gmail.com&gt;
Cc: Yonghong Song &lt;yhs@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
This work tries to make the semantics and code around the
narrower ctx access a bit easier to follow. Right now
everything is done inside the .is_valid_access(). Offset
matching is done differently for read/write types, meaning
writes don't support narrower access and thus matching only
on offsetof(struct foo, bar) is enough whereas for read
case that supports narrower access we must check for
offsetof(struct foo, bar) + offsetof(struct foo, bar) +
sizeof(&lt;bar&gt;) - 1 for each of the cases. For read cases of
individual members that don't support narrower access (like
packet pointers or skb-&gt;cb[] case which has its own narrow
access logic), we check as usual only offsetof(struct foo,
bar) like in write case. Then, for the case where narrower
access is allowed, we also need to set the aux info for the
access. Meaning, ctx_field_size and converted_op_size have
to be set. First is the original field size e.g. sizeof(&lt;bar&gt;)
as in above example from the user facing ctx, and latter
one is the target size after actual rewrite happened, thus
for the kernel facing ctx. Also here we need the range match
and we need to keep track changing convert_ctx_access() and
converted_op_size from is_valid_access() as both are not at
the same location.

We can simplify the code a bit: check_ctx_access() becomes
simpler in that we only store ctx_field_size as a meta data
and later in convert_ctx_accesses() we fetch the target_size
right from the location where we do convert. Should the verifier
be misconfigured we do reject for BPF_WRITE cases or target_size
that are not provided. For the subsystems, we always work on
ranges in is_valid_access() and add small helpers for ranges
and narrow access, convert_ctx_accesses() sets target_size
for the relevant instruction.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: John Fastabend &lt;john.fastabend@gmail.com&gt;
Cc: Yonghong Song &lt;yhs@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net</title>
<updated>2017-06-30T16:43:08+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>David S. Miller</name>
<email>davem@davemloft.net</email>
</author>
<published>2017-06-30T16:43:08+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=b07911593719828cac023bdcf6bf4da1c9ba546f'/>
<id>b07911593719828cac023bdcf6bf4da1c9ba546f</id>
<content type='text'>
A set of overlapping changes in macvlan and the rocker
driver, nothing serious.

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
A set of overlapping changes in macvlan and the rocker
driver, nothing serious.

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: prevent leaking pointer via xadd on unpriviledged</title>
<updated>2017-06-29T19:44:34+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Daniel Borkmann</name>
<email>daniel@iogearbox.net</email>
</author>
<published>2017-06-29T01:04:59+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=6bdf6abc56b53103324dfd270a86580306e1a232'/>
<id>6bdf6abc56b53103324dfd270a86580306e1a232</id>
<content type='text'>
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-&gt;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 &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau &lt;kafai@fb.com&gt;
Acked-by: Edward Cree &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
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-&gt;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 &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau &lt;kafai@fb.com&gt;
Acked-by: Edward Cree &lt;ecree@solarflare.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: possibly avoid extra masking for narrower load in verifier</title>
<updated>2017-06-23T18:04:11+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Yonghong Song</name>
<email>yhs@fb.com</email>
</author>
<published>2017-06-22T22:07:39+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=239946314e57711d7da546b67964d0b387a3ee42'/>
<id>239946314e57711d7da546b67964d0b387a3ee42</id>
<content type='text'>
Commit 31fd85816dbe ("bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program
context fields") permits narrower load for certain ctx fields.
The commit however will already generate a masking even if
the prog-specific ctx conversion produces the result with
narrower size.

For example, for __sk_buff-&gt;protocol, the ctx conversion
loads the data into register with 2-byte load.
A narrower 2-byte load should not generate masking.
For __sk_buff-&gt;vlan_present, the conversion function
set the result as either 0 or 1, essentially a byte.
The narrower 2-byte or 1-byte load should not generate masking.

To avoid unnecessary masking, prog-specific *_is_valid_access
now passes converted_op_size back to verifier, which indicates
the valid data width after perceived future conversion.
Based on this information, verifier is able to avoid
unnecessary marking.

Since we want more information back from prog-specific
*_is_valid_access checking, all of them are packed into
one data structure for more clarity.

Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song &lt;yhs@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
Commit 31fd85816dbe ("bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program
context fields") permits narrower load for certain ctx fields.
The commit however will already generate a masking even if
the prog-specific ctx conversion produces the result with
narrower size.

For example, for __sk_buff-&gt;protocol, the ctx conversion
loads the data into register with 2-byte load.
A narrower 2-byte load should not generate masking.
For __sk_buff-&gt;vlan_present, the conversion function
set the result as either 0 or 1, essentially a byte.
The narrower 2-byte or 1-byte load should not generate masking.

To avoid unnecessary masking, prog-specific *_is_valid_access
now passes converted_op_size back to verifier, which indicates
the valid data width after perceived future conversion.
Based on this information, verifier is able to avoid
unnecessary marking.

Since we want more information back from prog-specific
*_is_valid_access checking, all of them are packed into
one data structure for more clarity.

Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song &lt;yhs@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields</title>
<updated>2017-06-14T18:56:25+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Yonghong Song</name>
<email>yhs@fb.com</email>
</author>
<published>2017-06-13T22:52:13+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=31fd85816dbe3a714bcc3f67c17c3dd87011f79e'/>
<id>31fd85816dbe3a714bcc3f67c17c3dd87011f79e</id>
<content type='text'>
Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an
narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example,
        __u8 h = __sk_buff-&gt;hash, or
        __u16 p = __sk_buff-&gt;protocol
        __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data-&gt;sample_period
which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field.

This patch solves the issue by:
  . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the
    field size of narrower load from prog type
    specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier.
  . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates
    (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses
         supporting non-whole-field access
    (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access.
  . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is
    less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it
    to a full field load followed by proper masking.
  . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data-&gt;sample_period
    are supporting narrowing loads.
  . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores
    are just normal stores.

Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and
these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound
__sk_buff-&gt;cb access to proper field name and remove two
redundant "skb cb oob" tests.

Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song &lt;yhs@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an
narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example,
        __u8 h = __sk_buff-&gt;hash, or
        __u16 p = __sk_buff-&gt;protocol
        __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data-&gt;sample_period
which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field.

This patch solves the issue by:
  . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the
    field size of narrower load from prog type
    specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier.
  . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates
    (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses
         supporting non-whole-field access
    (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access.
  . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is
    less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it
    to a full field load followed by proper masking.
  . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data-&gt;sample_period
    are supporting narrowing loads.
  . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores
    are just normal stores.

Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and
these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound
__sk_buff-&gt;cb access to proper field name and remove two
redundant "skb cb oob" tests.

Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song &lt;yhs@fb.com&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: reset id on spilled regs in clear_all_pkt_pointers</title>
<updated>2017-06-10T23:05:45+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Daniel Borkmann</name>
<email>daniel@iogearbox.net</email>
</author>
<published>2017-06-10T22:50:43+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=36e24c003091a11ec847291c9a1d36d2ec92b155'/>
<id>36e24c003091a11ec847291c9a1d36d2ec92b155</id>
<content type='text'>
Right now, we don't reset the id of spilled registers in case of
clear_all_pkt_pointers(). Given pkt_pointers are highly likely to
contain an id, do so by reusing __mark_reg_unknown_value().

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
Right now, we don't reset the id of spilled registers in case of
clear_all_pkt_pointers(). Given pkt_pointers are highly likely to
contain an id, do so by reusing __mark_reg_unknown_value().

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>bpf: reset id on CONST_IMM transition</title>
<updated>2017-06-10T23:05:45+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>Daniel Borkmann</name>
<email>daniel@iogearbox.net</email>
</author>
<published>2017-06-10T22:50:42+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.tavy.me/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=4a2ff55aa4946b036b87572976cbfc6ab244c497'/>
<id>4a2ff55aa4946b036b87572976cbfc6ab244c497</id>
<content type='text'>
Whenever we set the register to the type CONST_IMM, we currently don't
reset the id to 0. id member is not used in CONST_IMM case, so don't
let it become stale, where pruning won't be able to match later on.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</content>
<content type='xhtml'>
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<pre>
Whenever we set the register to the type CONST_IMM, we currently don't
reset the id to 0. id member is not used in CONST_IMM case, so don't
let it become stale, where pruning won't be able to match later on.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann &lt;daniel@iogearbox.net&gt;
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov &lt;ast@kernel.org&gt;
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller &lt;davem@davemloft.net&gt;
</pre>
</div>
</content>
</entry>
</feed>
