commit 1b1597e64e1a610c7a96710fc4717158e98a08b3 upstream. Given we know the max possible value of ptr_limit at the time of retrieving the latter, add basic assertions, so that the verifier can bail out if anything looks odd and reject the program. Nothing triggered this so far, but it also does not hurt to have these. Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com> Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit b5871dca250cd391885218b99cc015aca1a51aea upstream. Instead of having the mov32 with aux->alu_limit - 1 immediate, move this operation to retrieve_ptr_limit() instead to simplify the logic and to allow for subsequent sanity boundary checks inside retrieve_ptr_limit(). This avoids in future that at the time of the verifier masking rewrite we'd run into an underflow which would not sign extend due to the nature of mov32 instruction. Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com> Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit 10d2bb2e6b1d8c4576c56a748f697dbeb8388899 upstream.
retrieve_ptr_limit() computes the ptr_limit for registers with stack and
map_value type. ptr_limit is the size of the memory area that is still
valid / in-bounds from the point of the current position and direction
of the operation (add / sub). This size will later be used for masking
the operation such that attempting out-of-bounds access in the speculative
domain is redirected to remain within the bounds of the current map value.
When masking to the right the size is correct, however, when masking to
the left, the size is off-by-one which would lead to an incorrect mask
and thus incorrect arithmetic operation in the non-speculative domain.
Piotr found that if the resulting alu_limit value is zero, then the
BPF_MOV32_IMM() from the fixup_bpf_calls() rewrite will end up loading
0xffffffff into AX instead of sign-extending to the full 64 bit range,
and as a result, this allows abuse for executing speculatively out-of-
bounds loads against 4GB window of address space and thus extracting the
contents of kernel memory via side-channel.
Fixes: 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on pointer arithmetic")
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit f232326f6966cf2a1d1db7bc917a4ce5f9f55f76 upstream.
The purpose of this patch is to streamline error propagation and in particular
to propagate retrieve_ptr_limit() errors for pointer types that are not defining
a ptr_limit such that register-based alu ops against these types can be rejected.
The main rationale is that a gap has been identified by Piotr in the existing
protection against speculatively out-of-bounds loads, for example, in case of
ctx pointers, unprivileged programs can still perform pointer arithmetic. This
can be abused to execute speculatively out-of-bounds loads without restrictions
and thus extract contents of kernel memory.
Fix this by rejecting unprivileged programs that attempt any pointer arithmetic
on unprotected pointer types. The two affected ones are pointer to ctx as well
as pointer to map. Field access to a modified ctx' pointer is rejected at a
later point in time in the verifier, and 7c6967326267 ("bpf: Permit map_ptr
arithmetic with opcode add and offset 0") only relevant for root-only use cases.
Risk of unprivileged program breakage is considered very low.
Fixes: 7c6967326267 ("bpf: Permit map_ptr arithmetic with opcode add and offset 0")
Fixes: b2157399cc98 ("bpf: prevent out-of-bounds speculation")
Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit 9b00f1b78809309163dda2d044d9e94a3c0248a3 upstream.
Recently noticed that when mod32 with a known src reg of 0 is performed,
then the dst register is 32-bit truncated in verifier:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: R0_w=inv0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: R0_w=inv0 R1_w=inv-1 R10=fp0
2: (b4) w2 = -1
3: R0_w=inv0 R1_w=inv-1 R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
3: (9c) w1 %= w0
4: R0_w=inv0 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
4: (b7) r0 = 1
5: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
5: (1d) if r1 == r2 goto pc+1
R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
6: R0_w=inv1 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
6: (b7) r0 = 2
7: R0_w=inv2 R1_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
7: (95) exit
7: R0=inv1 R1=inv(id=0,umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R2=inv4294967295 R10=fp0
7: (95) exit
However, as a runtime result, we get 2 instead of 1, meaning the dst
register does not contain (u32)-1 in this case. The reason is fairly
straight forward given the 0 test leaves the dst register as-is:
# ./bpftool p d x i 23
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: (b4) w2 = -1
3: (16) if w0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
4: (9c) w1 %= w0
5: (b7) r0 = 1
6: (1d) if r1 == r2 goto pc+1
7: (b7) r0 = 2
8: (95) exit
This was originally not an issue given the dst register was marked as
completely unknown (aka 64 bit unknown). However, after 468f6eafa6c4
("bpf: fix 32-bit ALU op verification") the verifier casts the register
output to 32 bit, and hence it becomes 32 bit unknown. Note that for
the case where the src register is unknown, the dst register is marked
64 bit unknown. After the fix, the register is truncated by the runtime
and the test passes:
# ./bpftool p d x i 23
0: (b7) r0 = 0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: (b4) w2 = -1
3: (16) if w0 == 0x0 goto pc+2
4: (9c) w1 %= w0
5: (05) goto pc+1
6: (bc) w1 = w1
7: (b7) r0 = 1
8: (1d) if r1 == r2 goto pc+1
9: (b7) r0 = 2
10: (95) exit
Semantics also match with {R,W}x mod{64,32} 0 -> {R,W}x. Invalid div
has always been {R,W}x div{64,32} 0 -> 0. Rewrites are as follows:
mod32: mod64:
(16) if w0 == 0x0 goto pc+2 (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
(9c) w1 %= w0 (9f) r1 %= r0
(05) goto pc+1
(bc) w1 = w1
Fixes: 468f6eafa6c4 ("bpf: fix 32-bit ALU op verification")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit e88b2c6e5a4d9ce30d75391e4d950da74bb2bd90 upstream.
While reviewing a different fix, John and I noticed an oddity in one of the
BPF program dumps that stood out, for example:
# bpftool p d x i 13
0: (b7) r0 = 808464450
1: (b4) w4 = 808464432
2: (bc) w0 = w0
3: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
4: (9c) w4 %= w0
[...]
In line 2 we noticed that the mov32 would 32 bit truncate the original src
register for the div/mod operation. While for the two operations the dst
register is typically marked unknown e.g. from adjust_scalar_min_max_vals()
the src register is not, and thus verifier keeps tracking original bounds,
simplified:
0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r0 = -1
1: R0_w=invP-1 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
1: (b7) r1 = -1
2: R0_w=invP-1 R1_w=invP-1 R10=fp0
2: (3c) w0 /= w1
3: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R1_w=invP-1 R10=fp0
3: (77) r1 >>= 32
4: R0_w=invP(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R1_w=invP4294967295 R10=fp0
4: (bf) r0 = r1
5: R0_w=invP4294967295 R1_w=invP4294967295 R10=fp0
5: (95) exit
processed 6 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 0 peak_states 0 mark_read 0
Runtime result of r0 at exit is 0 instead of expected -1. Remove the
verifier mov32 src rewrite in div/mod and replace it with a jmp32 test
instead. After the fix, we result in the following code generation when
having dividend r1 and divisor r6:
div, 64 bit: div, 32 bit:
0: (b7) r6 = 8 0: (b7) r6 = 8
1: (b7) r1 = 8 1: (b7) r1 = 8
2: (55) if r6 != 0x0 goto pc+2 2: (56) if w6 != 0x0 goto pc+2
3: (ac) w1 ^= w1 3: (ac) w1 ^= w1
4: (05) goto pc+1 4: (05) goto pc+1
5: (3f) r1 /= r6 5: (3c) w1 /= w6
6: (b7) r0 = 0 6: (b7) r0 = 0
7: (95) exit 7: (95) exit
mod, 64 bit: mod, 32 bit:
0: (b7) r6 = 8 0: (b7) r6 = 8
1: (b7) r1 = 8 1: (b7) r1 = 8
2: (15) if r6 == 0x0 goto pc+1 2: (16) if w6 == 0x0 goto pc+1
3: (9f) r1 %= r6 3: (9c) w1 %= w6
4: (b7) r0 = 0 4: (b7) r0 = 0
5: (95) exit 5: (95) exit
x86 in particular can throw a 'divide error' exception for div
instruction not only for divisor being zero, but also for the case
when the quotient is too large for the designated register. For the
edx:eax and rdx:rax dividend pair it is not an issue in x86 BPF JIT
since we always zero edx (rdx). Hence really the only protection
needed is against divisor being zero.
Fixes: 68fda450a7df ("bpf: fix 32-bit divide by zero")
Co-developed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[ Upstream commit 7c6967326267bd5c0dded0a99541357d70dd11ac ]
Commit 41c48f3a98231 ("bpf: Support access
to bpf map fields") added support to access map fields
with CORE support. For example,
struct bpf_map {
__u32 max_entries;
} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
struct bpf_array {
struct bpf_map map;
__u32 elem_size;
} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
struct {
__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY);
__uint(max_entries, 4);
__type(key, __u32);
__type(value, __u32);
} m_array SEC(".maps");
SEC("cgroup_skb/egress")
int cg_skb(void *ctx)
{
struct bpf_array *array = (struct bpf_array *)&m_array;
/* .. array->map.max_entries .. */
}
In kernel, bpf_htab has similar structure,
struct bpf_htab {
struct bpf_map map;
...
}
In the above cg_skb(), to access array->map.max_entries, with CORE, the clang will
generate two builtin's.
base = &m_array;
/* access array.map */
map_addr = __builtin_preserve_struct_access_info(base, 0, 0);
/* access array.map.max_entries */
max_entries_addr = __builtin_preserve_struct_access_info(map_addr, 0, 0);
max_entries = *max_entries_addr;
In the current llvm, if two builtin's are in the same function or
in the same function after inlining, the compiler is smart enough to chain
them together and generates like below:
base = &m_array;
max_entries = *(base + reloc_offset); /* reloc_offset = 0 in this case */
and we are fine.
But if we force no inlining for one of functions in test_map_ptr() selftest, e.g.,
check_default(), the above two __builtin_preserve_* will be in two different
functions. In this case, we will have code like:
func check_hash():
reloc_offset_map = 0;
base = &m_array;
map_base = base + reloc_offset_map;
check_default(map_base, ...)
func check_default(map_base, ...):
max_entries = *(map_base + reloc_offset_max_entries);
In kernel, map_ptr (CONST_PTR_TO_MAP) does not allow any arithmetic.
The above "map_base = base + reloc_offset_map" will trigger a verifier failure.
; VERIFY(check_default(&hash->map, map));
0: (18) r7 = 0xffffb4fe8018a004
2: (b4) w1 = 110
3: (63) *(u32 *)(r7 +0) = r1
R1_w=invP110 R7_w=map_value(id=0,off=4,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) R10=fp0
; VERIFY_TYPE(BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH, check_hash);
4: (18) r1 = 0xffffb4fe8018a000
6: (b4) w2 = 1
7: (63) *(u32 *)(r1 +0) = r2
R1_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) R2_w=invP1 R7_w=map_value(id=0,off=4,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) R10=fp0
8: (b7) r2 = 0
9: (18) r8 = 0xffff90bcb500c000
11: (18) r1 = 0xffff90bcb500c000
13: (0f) r1 += r2
R1 pointer arithmetic on map_ptr prohibited
To fix the issue, let us permit map_ptr + 0 arithmetic which will
result in exactly the same map_ptr.
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200908175702.2463625-1-yhs@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 7f6e4312e15a5c370e84eaa685879b6bdcc717e4 ] Protect against potential stack overflow that might happen when bpf2bpf calls get combined with tailcalls. Limit the caller's stack depth for such case down to 256 so that the worst case scenario would result in 8k stack size (32 which is tailcall limit * 256 = 8k). Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
commit 6e7e63cbb023976d828cdb22422606bf77baa8a9 upstream.
When check_xadd() verifies an XADD operation on a pointer to a stack slot
containing a spilled pointer, check_stack_read() verifies that the read,
which is part of XADD, is valid. However, since the placeholder value -1 is
passed as `value_regno`, check_stack_read() can only return a binary
decision and can't return the type of the value that was read. The intent
here is to verify whether the value read from the stack slot may be used as
a SCALAR_VALUE; but since check_stack_read() doesn't check the type, and
the type information is lost when check_stack_read() returns, this is not
enforced, and a malicious user can abuse XADD to leak spilled kernel
pointers.
Fix it by letting check_stack_read() verify that the value is usable as a
SCALAR_VALUE if no type information is passed to the caller.
To be able to use __is_pointer_value() in check_stack_read(), move it up.
Fix up the expected unprivileged error message for a BPF selftest that,
until now, assumed that unprivileged users can use XADD on stack-spilled
pointers. This also gives us a test for the behavior introduced in this
patch for free.
In theory, this could also be fixed by forbidding XADD on stack spills
entirely, since XADD is a locked operation (for operations on memory with
concurrency) and there can't be any concurrency on the BPF stack; but
Alexei has said that he wants to keep XADD on stack slots working to avoid
changes to the test suite [1].
The following BPF program demonstrates how to leak a BPF map pointer as an
unprivileged user using this bug:
// r7 = map_pointer
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_7, small_map),
// r8 = launder(map_pointer)
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, BPF_REG_7, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
((struct bpf_insn) {
.code = BPF_STX | BPF_DW | BPF_XADD,
.dst_reg = BPF_REG_FP,
.src_reg = BPF_REG_1,
.off = -8
}),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_FP, -8),
// store r8 into map
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_ARG1, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_ARG2, BPF_REG_FP),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_ARG2, -4),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_ARG2, 0, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN()
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200416211116.qxqcza5vo2ddnkdq@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com/
Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200417000007.10734-1-jannh@google.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[ no upstream commit ]
See the glory details in 100605035e15 ("bpf: Verifier, do_refine_retval_range
may clamp umin to 0 incorrectly") for why 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine
retval R0 state for bpf_get_stack helper") is buggy. The whole series however
is not suitable for stable since it adds significant amount [0] of verifier
complexity in order to add 32bit subreg tracking. Something simpler is needed.
Unfortunately, reverting 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine retval R0 state
for bpf_get_stack helper") or just cherry-picking 100605035e15 ("bpf: Verifier,
do_refine_retval_range may clamp umin to 0 incorrectly") is not an option since
it will break existing tracing programs badly (at least those that are using
bpf_get_stack() and bpf_probe_read_str() helpers). Not fixing it in stable is
also not an option since on 4.19 kernels an error will cause a soft-lockup due
to hitting dead-code sanitized branch since we don't hard-wire such branches
in old kernels yet. But even then for 5.x 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine
retval R0 state for bpf_get_stack helper") would cause wrong bounds on the
verifier simluation when an error is hit.
In one of the earlier iterations of mentioned patch series for upstream there
was the concern that just using smax_value in do_refine_retval_range() would
nuke bounds by subsequent <<32 >>32 shifts before the comparison against 0 [1]
which eventually led to the 32bit subreg tracking in the first place. While I
initially went for implementing the idea [1] to pattern match the two shift
operations, it turned out to be more complex than actually needed, meaning, we
could simply treat do_refine_retval_range() similarly to how we branch off
verification for conditionals or under speculation, that is, pushing a new
reg state to the stack for later verification. This means, instead of verifying
the current path with the ret_reg in [S32MIN, msize_max_value] interval where
later bounds would get nuked, we split this into two: i) for the success case
where ret_reg can be in [0, msize_max_value], and ii) for the error case with
ret_reg known to be in interval [S32MIN, -1]. Latter will preserve the bounds
during these shift patterns and can match reg < 0 test. test_progs also succeed
with this approach.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158507130343.15666.8018068546764556975.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158015334199.28573.4940395881683556537.stgit@john-XPS-13-9370/T/#m2e0ad1d5949131014748b6daa48a3495e7f0456d
Fixes: 849fa50662fb ("bpf/verifier: refine retval R0 state for bpf_get_stack helper")
Reported-by: Lorenzo Fontana <fontanalorenz@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Leonardo Di Donato <leodidonato@gmail.com>
Reported-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Tested-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>