[ Upstream commit f6a6a5a976288e4d0d94eb1c6c9e983e8e5cdb31 ]
bpf_obj_drop_impl has a void return type. In check_kfunc_call, the "else
if" which sets insn_aux->kptr_struct_meta for bpf_obj_drop_impl is
surrounded by a larger if statement which checks btf_type_is_ptr. As a
result:
* The bpf_obj_drop_impl-specific code will never execute
* The btf_struct_meta input to bpf_obj_drop is always NULL
* __bpf_obj_drop_impl will always see a NULL btf_record when called
from BPF program, and won't call bpf_obj_free_fields
* program-allocated kptrs which have fields that should be cleaned up
by bpf_obj_free_fields may instead leak resources
This patch adds a btf_type_is_void branch to the larger if and moves
special handling for bpf_obj_drop_impl there, fixing the issue.
Fixes: ac9f06050a35 ("bpf: Introduce bpf_obj_drop")
Cc: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230403200027.2271029-1-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 07236eab7a3139da97aef9f5f21f403be82a82ea ]
Factor out logic to fetch basic kfunc metadata based on struct bpf_insn.
This is not exactly short or trivial code to just copy/paste and this
information is sometimes necessary in other parts of the verifier logic.
Subsequent patches will rely on this to determine if an instruction is
a kfunc call to iterator next method.
No functional changes intended, including that verbose() warning
behavior when kfunc is not allowed for a particular program type.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230308184121.1165081-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Stable-dep-of: f6a6a5a97628 ("bpf: Fix struct_meta lookup for bpf_obj_free_fields kfunc call")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 7be14c1c9030f73cc18b4ff23b78a0a081f16188 ]
Xu reports that after commit 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32
bounds tracking"), the following BPF program is rejected by the verifier:
0: (61) r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) ; R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0)
1: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r1 +4) ; R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0)
2: (bf) r1 = r2
3: (07) r1 += 1
4: (2d) if r1 > r3 goto pc+8
5: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0) ; R1_w=scalar(umax=255,var_off=(0x0; 0xff))
6: (18) r0 = 0x7fffffffffffff10
8: (0f) r1 += r0 ; R1_w=scalar(umin=0x7fffffffffffff10,umax=0x800000000000000f)
9: (18) r0 = 0x8000000000000000
11: (07) r0 += 1
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
13: (b7) r0 = 0
14: (95) exit
And the verifier log says:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (61) r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) ; R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0)
1: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r1 +4) ; R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0)
2: (bf) r1 = r2 ; R1_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0)
3: (07) r1 += 1 ; R1_w=pkt(off=1,r=0,imm=0)
4: (2d) if r1 > r3 goto pc+8 ; R1_w=pkt(off=1,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0)
5: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0) ; R1_w=scalar(umax=255,var_off=(0x0; 0xff)) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0)
6: (18) r0 = 0x7fffffffffffff10 ; R0_w=9223372036854775568
8: (0f) r1 += r0 ; R0_w=9223372036854775568 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775568,umax=9223372036854775823,s32_min=-240,s32_max=15)
9: (18) r0 = 0x8000000000000000 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775808
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775807
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775807 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775568,umax=9223372036854775809)
13: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
14: (95) exit
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775807 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775810,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff)) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775806
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775806 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775810,umax=9223372036854775810,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff))
13: safe
[...]
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775795 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775822,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff)) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775794
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775794 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775822,umax=9223372036854775822,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff))
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775794 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775823,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff)) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775793
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775793 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775823,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff))
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775793 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775824,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff)) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775792
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775792 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775824,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff))
13: safe
[...]
The 64bit umin=9223372036854775810 bound continuously bumps by +1 while
umax=9223372036854775823 stays as-is until the verifier complexity limit
is reached and the program gets finally rejected. During this simulation,
the umin also eventually surpasses umax. Looking at the first 'from 12
to 11' output line from the loop, R1 has the following state:
R1_w=scalar(umin=0x8000000000000002 (9223372036854775810),
umax=0x800000000000000f (9223372036854775823),
var_off=(0x8000000000000000;
0xffffffff))
The var_off has technically not an inconsistent state but it's very
imprecise and far off surpassing 64bit umax bounds whereas the expected
output with refined known bits in var_off should have been like:
R1_w=scalar(umin=0x8000000000000002 (9223372036854775810),
umax=0x800000000000000f (9223372036854775823),
var_off=(0x8000000000000000;
0xf))
In the above log, var_off stays as var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff)
and does not converge into a narrower mask where more bits become known,
eventually transforming R1 into a constant upon umin=9223372036854775823,
umax=9223372036854775823 case where the verifier would have terminated and
let the program pass.
The __reg_combine_64_into_32() marks the subregister unknown and propagates
64bit {s,u}min/{s,u}max bounds to their 32bit equivalents iff they are within
the 32bit universe. The question came up whether __reg_combine_64_into_32()
should special case the situation that when 64bit {s,u}min bounds have
the same value as 64bit {s,u}max bounds to then assign the latter as
well to the 32bit reg->{s,u}32_{min,max}_value. As can be seen from the
above example however, that is just /one/ special case and not a /generic/
solution given above example would still not be addressed this way and
remain at an imprecise var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xffffffff).
The improvement is needed in __reg_bound_offset() to refine var32_off with
the updated var64_off instead of the prior reg->var_off. The reg_bounds_sync()
code first refines information about the register's min/max bounds via
__update_reg_bounds() from the current var_off, then in __reg_deduce_bounds()
from sign bit and with the potentially learned bits from bounds it'll
update the var_off tnum in __reg_bound_offset(). For example, intersecting
with the old var_off might have improved bounds slightly, e.g. if umax
was 0x7f...f and var_off was (0; 0xf...fc), then new var_off will then
result in (0; 0x7f...fc). The intersected var64_off holds then the
universe which is a superset of var32_off. The point for the latter is
not to broaden, but to further refine known bits based on the intersection
of var_off with 32 bit bounds, so that we later construct the final var_off
from upper and lower 32 bits. The final __update_reg_bounds() can then
potentially still slightly refine bounds if more bits became known from the
new var_off.
After the improvement, we can see R1 converging successively:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (61) r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) ; R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0)
1: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r1 +4) ; R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0)
2: (bf) r1 = r2 ; R1_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=0,imm=0)
3: (07) r1 += 1 ; R1_w=pkt(off=1,r=0,imm=0)
4: (2d) if r1 > r3 goto pc+8 ; R1_w=pkt(off=1,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0)
5: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0) ; R1_w=scalar(umax=255,var_off=(0x0; 0xff)) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0)
6: (18) r0 = 0x7fffffffffffff10 ; R0_w=9223372036854775568
8: (0f) r1 += r0 ; R0_w=9223372036854775568 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775568,umax=9223372036854775823,s32_min=-240,s32_max=15)
9: (18) r0 = 0x8000000000000000 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775808
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775807
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775807 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775568,umax=9223372036854775809)
13: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
14: (95) exit
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775807 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775810,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xf),s32_min=0,s32_max=15,u32_max=15) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775806
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775806 R1_w=-9223372036854775806
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775806 R1_w=scalar(umin=9223372036854775811,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xf),s32_min=0,s32_max=15,u32_max=15) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775805
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775805 R1_w=-9223372036854775805
13: safe
[...]
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775798 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775819,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000008; 0x7),s32_min=8,s32_max=15,u32_min=8,u32_max=15) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775797
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775797 R1=-9223372036854775797
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775797 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775820,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x800000000000000c; 0x3),s32_min=12,s32_max=15,u32_min=12,u32_max=15) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775796
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775796 R1=-9223372036854775796
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775796 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775821,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x800000000000000c; 0x3),s32_min=12,s32_max=15,u32_min=12,u32_max=15) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775795
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775795 R1=-9223372036854775795
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775795 R1=scalar(umin=9223372036854775822,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x800000000000000e; 0x1),s32_min=14,s32_max=15,u32_min=14,u32_max=15) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775794
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775794 R1=-9223372036854775794
13: safe
from 12 to 11: R0_w=-9223372036854775794 R1=-9223372036854775793 R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
11: (07) r0 += 1 ; R0_w=-9223372036854775793
12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
last_idx 12 first_idx 12
parent didn't have regs=1 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=P-9223372036854775801 R1_r=scalar(umin=9223372036854775815,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xf),s32_min=0,s32_max=15,u32_max=15) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
last_idx 11 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
parent didn't have regs=1 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=P-9223372036854775805 R1_rw=scalar(umin=9223372036854775812,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xf),s32_min=0,s32_max=15,u32_max=15) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
last_idx 12 first_idx 0
regs=1 stack=0 before 12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
regs=1 stack=0 before 12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
regs=1 stack=0 before 12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
regs=1 stack=0 before 9: (18) r0 = 0x8000000000000000
last_idx 12 first_idx 12
parent didn't have regs=2 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=P-9223372036854775801 R1_r=Pscalar(umin=9223372036854775815,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xf),s32_min=0,s32_max=15,u32_max=15) R2=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
last_idx 11 first_idx 11
regs=2 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
parent didn't have regs=2 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=P-9223372036854775805 R1_rw=Pscalar(umin=9223372036854775812,umax=9223372036854775823,var_off=(0x8000000000000000; 0xf),s32_min=0,s32_max=15,u32_max=15) R2_w=pkt(off=0,r=1,imm=0) R3_w=pkt_end(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
last_idx 12 first_idx 0
regs=2 stack=0 before 12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
regs=2 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
regs=2 stack=0 before 12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
regs=2 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
regs=2 stack=0 before 12: (ad) if r0 < r1 goto pc-2
regs=2 stack=0 before 11: (07) r0 += 1
regs=2 stack=0 before 9: (18) r0 = 0x8000000000000000
regs=2 stack=0 before 8: (0f) r1 += r0
regs=3 stack=0 before 6: (18) r0 = 0x7fffffffffffff10
regs=2 stack=0 before 5: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 +0)
13: safe
from 4 to 13: safe
verification time 322 usec
stack depth 0
processed 56 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 1 total_states 3 peak_states 3 mark_read 1
This also fixes up a test case along with this improvement where we match
on the verifier log. The updated log now has a refined var_off, too.
Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230314203424.4015351-2-xukuohai@huaweicloud.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230322213056.2470-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit d7ba4cc900bf1eea2d8c807c6b1fc6bd61f41237 ]
This patch changes the return types of bpf_map_ops functions to long, where
previously int was returned. Using long allows for bpf programs to maintain
the sign bit in the absence of sign extension during situations where
inlined bpf helper funcs make calls to the bpf_map_ops funcs and a negative
error is returned.
The definitions of the helper funcs are generated from comments in the bpf
uapi header at `include/uapi/linux/bpf.h`. The return type of these
helpers was previously changed from int to long in commit bdb7b79b4ce8. For
any case where one of the map helpers call the bpf_map_ops funcs that are
still returning 32-bit int, a compiler might not include sign extension
instructions to properly convert the 32-bit negative value a 64-bit
negative value.
For example:
bpf assembly excerpt of an inlined helper calling a kernel function and
checking for a specific error:
; err = bpf_map_update_elem(&mymap, &key, &val, BPF_NOEXIST);
...
46: call 0xffffffffe103291c ; htab_map_update_elem
; if (err && err != -EEXIST) {
4b: cmp $0xffffffffffffffef,%rax ; cmp -EEXIST,%rax
kernel function assembly excerpt of return value from
`htab_map_update_elem` returning 32-bit int:
movl $0xffffffef, %r9d
...
movl %r9d, %eax
...results in the comparison:
cmp $0xffffffffffffffef, $0x00000000ffffffef
Fixes: bdb7b79b4ce8 ("bpf: Switch most helper return values from 32-bit int to 64-bit long")
Tested-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230322194754.185781-3-inwardvessel@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 082cdc69a4651dd2a77539d69416a359ed1214f5 ]
For every BPF_ADD/SUB involving a pointer, adjust_ptr_min_max_vals()
ensures that the resulting pointer has a constant offset if
bypass_spec_v1 is false. This is ensured by calling sanitize_check_bounds()
which in turn calls check_stack_access_for_ptr_arithmetic(). There,
-EACCESS is returned if the register's offset is not constant, thereby
rejecting the program.
In summary, an unprivileged user must never be able to create stack
pointers with a variable offset. That is also the case, because a
respective check in check_stack_write() is missing. If they were able
to create a variable-offset pointer, users could still use it in a
stack-write operation to trigger unsafe speculative behavior [1].
Because unprivileged users must already be prevented from creating
variable-offset stack pointers, viable options are to either remove
this check (replacing it with a clarifying comment), or to turn it
into a "verifier BUG"-message, also adding a similar check in
check_stack_write() (for consistency, as a second-level defense).
This patch implements the first option to reduce verifier bloat.
This check was introduced by commit 01f810ace9ed ("bpf: Allow
variable-offset stack access") which correctly notes that
"variable-offset reads and writes are disallowed (they were already
disallowed for the indirect access case) because the speculative
execution checking code doesn't support them". However, it does not
further discuss why the check in check_stack_read() is necessary.
The code which made this check obsolete was also introduced in this
commit.
I have compiled ~650 programs from the Linux selftests, Linux samples,
Cilium, and libbpf/examples projects and confirmed that none of these
trigger the check in check_stack_read() [2]. Instead, all of these
programs are, as expected, already rejected when constructing the
variable-offset pointers. Note that the check in
check_stack_access_for_ptr_arithmetic() also prints "off=%d" while the
code removed by this patch does not (the error removed does not appear
in the "verification_error" values). For reproducibility, the
repository linked includes the raw data and scripts used to create
the plot.
[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.03757.pdf
[2] https://gitlab.cs.fau.de/un65esoq/bpf-spectre/-/raw/53dc19fcf459c186613b1156a81504b39c8d49db/data/plots/23-02-26_23-56_bpftool/bpftool/0004-errors.pdf?inline=false
Fixes: 01f810ace9ed ("bpf: Allow variable-offset stack access")
Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst <gerhorst@cs.fau.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230315165358.23701-1-gerhorst@cs.fau.de
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 34f0677e7afd3a292bc1aadda7ce8e35faedb204 ]
Fix wrong order of frame index vs register/slot index in precision
propagation verbose (level 2) output. It's wrong and very confusing as is.
Fixes: 529409ea92d5 ("bpf: propagate precision across all frames, not just the last one")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230313184017.4083374-1-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 52c2b005a3c18c565fc70cfd0ca49375f301e952 ]
When doing state comparison, if old state has register that is not
marked as REG_LIVE_READ, then we just skip comparison, regardless what's
the state of corresponing register in current state. This is because not
REG_LIVE_READ register is irrelevant for further program execution and
correctness. All good here.
But when we get to precision propagation, after two states were declared
equivalent, we don't take into account old register's liveness, and thus
attempt to propagate precision for register in current state even if
that register in old state was not REG_LIVE_READ anymore. This is bad,
because register in current state could be anything at all and this
could cause -EFAULT due to internal logic bugs.
Fix by taking into account REG_LIVE_READ liveness mark to keep the logic
in state comparison in sync with precision propagation.
Fixes: a3ce685dd01a ("bpf: fix precision tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230309224131.57449-1-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Juan Jose et al reported an issue found via fuzzing where the verifier's
pruning logic prematurely marks a program path as safe.
Consider the following program:
0: (b7) r6 = 1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0
2: (b7) r8 = 0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
7: (97) r6 %= 1
8: (b7) r9 = 0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
10: (b7) r6 = 0
11: (b7) r0 = 0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff888103693400 // map_ptr(ks=4,vs=48)
15: (bf) r1 = r4
16: (bf) r2 = r10
17: (07) r2 += -4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
20: (95) exit
21: (77) r6 >>= 10
22: (27) r6 *= 8192
23: (bf) r1 = r0
24: (0f) r0 += r6
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0)
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3
27: (95) exit
The verifier treats this as safe, leading to oob read/write access due
to an incorrect verifier conclusion:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r6 = 1024 ; R6_w=1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0 ; R7_w=0
2: (b7) r8 = 0 ; R8_w=0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648 ; R9_w=-2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025 ; R6_w=scalar()
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2 ; R6_w=scalar(umin=18446744071562067969,var_off=(0xffffffff00000000; 0xffffffff)) R9_w=-2147483648
7: (97) r6 %= 1 ; R6_w=scalar()
8: (b7) r9 = 0 ; R9=0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
10: (b7) r6 = 0 ; R6_w=0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 9
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=0
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=0
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 19
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_rw=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 18 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 10: (b7) r6 = 0
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0) ; R0_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3 ; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
27: (95) exit
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_r=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar() R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_rw=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 8 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 8: (b7) r9 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 7: (97) r6 %= 1
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=40 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=40 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=40 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
19: safe
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=40 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=40 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=40 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
from 6 to 9: safe
verification time 110 usec
stack depth 4
processed 36 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 3 peak_states 3 mark_read 2
The verifier considers this program as safe by mistakenly pruning unsafe
code paths. In the above func#0, code lines 0-10 are of interest. In line
0-3 registers r6 to r9 are initialized with known scalar values. In line 4
the register r6 is reset to an unknown scalar given the verifier does not
track modulo operations. Due to this, the verifier can also not determine
precisely which branches in line 6 and 9 are taken, therefore it needs to
explore them both.
As can be seen, the verifier starts with exploring the false/fall-through
paths first. The 'from 19 to 21' path has both r6=0 and r9=0 and the pointer
arithmetic on r0 += r6 is therefore considered safe. Given the arithmetic,
r6 is correctly marked for precision tracking where backtracking kicks in
where it walks back the current path all the way where r6 was set to 0 in
the fall-through branch.
Next, the pruning logics pops the path 'from 9 to 11' from the stack. Also
here, the state of the registers is the same, that is, r6=0 and r9=0, so
that at line 19 the path can be pruned as it is considered safe. It is
interesting to note that the conditional in line 9 turned r6 into a more
precise state, that is, in the fall-through path at the beginning of line
10, it is R6=scalar(umin=1), and in the branch-taken path (which is analyzed
here) at the beginning of line 11, r6 turned into a known const r6=0 as
r9=0 prior to that and therefore (unsigned) r6 <= 0 concludes that r6 must
be 0 (**):
[...] ; R6_w=scalar()
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
[...]
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
[...]
The next path is 'from 6 to 9'. The verifier considers the old and current
state equivalent, and therefore prunes the search incorrectly. Looking into
the two states which are being compared by the pruning logic at line 9, the
old state consists of R6_rwD=Pscalar() R9_rwD=0 R10=fp0 and the new state
consists of R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_w=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968)
R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0. While r6 had the reg->precise flag
correctly set in the old state, r9 did not. Both r6'es are considered as
equivalent given the old one is a superset of the current, more precise one,
however, r9's actual values (0 vs 0x80000000) mismatch. Given the old r9
did not have reg->precise flag set, the verifier does not consider the
register as contributing to the precision state of r6, and therefore it
considered both r9 states as equivalent. However, for this specific pruned
path (which is also the actual path taken at runtime), register r6 will be
0x400 and r9 0x80000000 when reaching line 21, thus oob-accessing the map.
The purpose of precision tracking is to initially mark registers (including
spilled ones) as imprecise to help verifier's pruning logic finding equivalent
states it can then prune if they don't contribute to the program's safety
aspects. For example, if registers are used for pointer arithmetic or to pass
constant length to a helper, then the verifier sets reg->precise flag and
backtracks the BPF program instruction sequence and chain of verifier states
to ensure that the given register or stack slot including their dependencies
are marked as precisely tracked scalar. This also includes any other registers
and slots that contribute to a tracked state of given registers/stack slot.
This backtracking relies on recorded jmp_history and is able to traverse
entire chain of parent states. This process ends only when all the necessary
registers/slots and their transitive dependencies are marked as precise.
The backtrack_insn() is called from the current instruction up to the first
instruction, and its purpose is to compute a bitmask of registers and stack
slots that need precision tracking in the parent's verifier state. For example,
if a current instruction is r6 = r7, then r6 needs precision after this
instruction and r7 needs precision before this instruction, that is, in the
parent state. Hence for the latter r7 is marked and r6 unmarked.
For the class of jmp/jmp32 instructions, backtrack_insn() today only looks
at call and exit instructions and for all other conditionals the masks
remain as-is. However, in the given situation register r6 has a dependency
on r9 (as described above in **), so also that one needs to be marked for
precision tracking. In other words, if an imprecise register influences a
precise one, then the imprecise register should also be marked precise.
Meaning, in the parent state both dest and src register need to be tracked
for precision and therefore the marking must be more conservative by setting
reg->precise flag for both. The precision propagation needs to cover both
for the conditional: if the src reg was marked but not the dst reg and vice
versa.
After the fix the program is correctly rejected:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r6 = 1024 ; R6_w=1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0 ; R7_w=0
2: (b7) r8 = 0 ; R8_w=0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648 ; R9_w=-2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025 ; R6_w=scalar()
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2 ; R6_w=scalar(umin=18446744071562067969,var_off=(0xffffffff80000000; 0x7fffffff),u32_min=-2147483648) R9_w=-2147483648
7: (97) r6 %= 1 ; R6_w=scalar()
8: (b7) r9 = 0 ; R9=0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
10: (b7) r6 = 0 ; R6_w=0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 9
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=0
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=0
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 19
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_rw=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 18 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 10: (b7) r6 = 0
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0) ; R0_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3 ; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
27: (95) exit
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_r=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=240 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar() R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_rw=P0 R10=fp0
last_idx 8 first_idx 0
regs=240 stack=0 before 8: (b7) r9 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 7: (97) r6 %= 1
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
19: safe
from 6 to 9: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_w=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=200 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
11: R6=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R9=-2147483648
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0_w=map_value_or_null(id=3,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0_w=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7=0 R8=0 R9=-2147483648 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=scalar(umax=18014398507384832,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fffffffffffff))
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=scalar(smax=9223372036854767616,umax=18446744073709543424,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffffffffe000),s32_max=2147475456,u32_max=-8192)
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 21
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_r=Pscalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7=0 R8=0 R9=-2147483648 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
regs=240 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
math between map_value pointer and register with unbounded min value is not allowed
verification time 886 usec
stack depth 4
processed 49 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 1 total_states 5 peak_states 5 mark_read 2
Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Reported-by: Juan Jose Lopez Jaimez <jjlopezjaimez@google.com>
Reported-by: Meador Inge <meadori@google.com>
Reported-by: Simon Scannell <simonscannell@google.com>
Reported-by: Nenad Stojanovski <thenenadx@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Co-developed-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Juan Jose Lopez Jaimez <jjlopezjaimez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Meador Inge <meadori@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Scannell <simonscannell@google.com>
This commits updates the following functions to allow reads from
uninitialized stack locations when env->allow_uninit_stack option is
enabled:
- check_stack_read_fixed_off()
- check_stack_range_initialized(), called from:
- check_stack_read_var_off()
- check_helper_mem_access()
Such change allows to relax logic in stacksafe() to treat STACK_MISC
and STACK_INVALID in a same way and make the following stack slot
configurations equivalent:
| Cached state | Current state |
| stack slot | stack slot |
|------------------+------------------|
| STACK_INVALID or | STACK_INVALID or |
| STACK_MISC | STACK_SPILL or |
| | STACK_MISC or |
| | STACK_ZERO or |
| | STACK_DYNPTR |
This leads to significant verification speed gains (see below).
The idea was suggested by Andrii Nakryiko [1] and initial patch was
created by Alexei Starovoitov [2].
Currently the env->allow_uninit_stack is allowed for programs loaded
by users with CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN capabilities.
A number of test cases from verifier/*.c were expecting uninitialized
stack access to be an error. These test cases were updated to execute
in unprivileged mode (thus preserving the tests).
The test progs/test_global_func10.c expected "invalid indirect read
from stack" error message because of the access to uninitialized
memory region. This error is no longer possible in privileged mode.
The test is updated to provoke an error "invalid indirect access to
stack" because of access to invalid stack address (such error is not
verified by progs/test_global_func*.c series of tests).
The following tests had to be removed because these can't be made
unprivileged:
- verifier/sock.c:
- "sk_storage_get(map, skb->sk, &stack_value, 1): partially init
stack_value"
BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS programs are not executed in unprivileged mode.
- verifier/var_off.c:
- "indirect variable-offset stack access, max_off+size > max_initialized"
- "indirect variable-offset stack access, uninitialized"
These tests verify that access to uninitialized stack values is
detected when stack offset is not a constant. However, variable
stack access is prohibited in unprivileged mode, thus these tests
are no longer valid.
* * *
Here is veristat log comparing this patch with current master on a
set of selftest binaries listed in tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.cfg
and cilium BPF binaries (see [3]):
$ ./veristat -e file,prog,states -C -f 'states_pct<-30' master.log current.log
File Program States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)
-------------------------- -------------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------------
bpf_host.o tail_handle_ipv6_from_host 349 244 -105 (-30.09%)
bpf_host.o tail_handle_nat_fwd_ipv4 1320 895 -425 (-32.20%)
bpf_lxc.o tail_handle_nat_fwd_ipv4 1320 895 -425 (-32.20%)
bpf_sock.o cil_sock4_connect 70 48 -22 (-31.43%)
bpf_sock.o cil_sock4_sendmsg 68 46 -22 (-32.35%)
bpf_xdp.o tail_handle_nat_fwd_ipv4 1554 803 -751 (-48.33%)
bpf_xdp.o tail_lb_ipv4 6457 2473 -3984 (-61.70%)
bpf_xdp.o tail_lb_ipv6 7249 3908 -3341 (-46.09%)
pyperf600_bpf_loop.bpf.o on_event 287 145 -142 (-49.48%)
strobemeta.bpf.o on_event 15915 4772 -11143 (-70.02%)
strobemeta_nounroll2.bpf.o on_event 17087 3820 -13267 (-77.64%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.o syncookie_tc 21271 6635 -14636 (-68.81%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.o syncookie_xdp 23122 6024 -17098 (-73.95%)
-------------------------- -------------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------------
Note: I limited selection by states_pct<-30%.
Inspection of differences in pyperf600_bpf_loop behavior shows that
the following patch for the test removes almost all differences:
- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/pyperf.h
+ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/pyperf.h
@ -266,8 +266,8 @ int __on_event(struct bpf_raw_tracepoint_args *ctx)
}
if (event->pthread_match || !pidData->use_tls) {
- void* frame_ptr;
- FrameData frame;
+ void* frame_ptr = 0;
+ FrameData frame = {};
Symbol sym = {};
int cur_cpu = bpf_get_smp_processor_id();
W/o this patch the difference comes from the following pattern
(for different variables):
static bool get_frame_data(... FrameData *frame ...)
{
...
bpf_probe_read_user(&frame->f_code, ...);
if (!frame->f_code)
return false;
...
bpf_probe_read_user(&frame->co_name, ...);
if (frame->co_name)
...;
}
int __on_event(struct bpf_raw_tracepoint_args *ctx)
{
FrameData frame;
...
get_frame_data(... &frame ...) // indirectly via a bpf_loop & callback
...
}
SEC("raw_tracepoint/kfree_skb")
int on_event(struct bpf_raw_tracepoint_args* ctx)
{
...
ret |= __on_event(ctx);
ret |= __on_event(ctx);
...
}
With regards to value `frame->co_name` the following is important:
- Because of the conditional `if (!frame->f_code)` each call to
__on_event() produces two states, one with `frame->co_name` marked
as STACK_MISC, another with it as is (and marked STACK_INVALID on a
first call).
- The call to bpf_probe_read_user() does not mark stack slots
corresponding to `&frame->co_name` as REG_LIVE_WRITTEN but it marks
these slots as BPF_MISC, this happens because of the following loop
in the check_helper_call():
for (i = 0; i < meta.access_size; i++) {
err = check_mem_access(env, insn_idx, meta.regno, i, BPF_B,
BPF_WRITE, -1, false);
if (err)
return err;
}
Note the size of the write, it is a one byte write for each byte
touched by a helper. The BPF_B write does not lead to write marks
for the target stack slot.
- Which means that w/o this patch when second __on_event() call is
verified `if (frame->co_name)` will propagate read marks first to a
stack slot with STACK_MISC marks and second to a stack slot with
STACK_INVALID marks and these states would be considered different.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzY3e+ZuC6HUa8dCiUovQRg2SzEk7M-dSkqNZyn=xEmnPA@mail.gmail.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAADnVQKs2i1iuZ5SUGuJtxWVfGYR9kDgYKhq3rNV+kBLQCu7rA@mail.gmail.com/
[3] git@github.com:anakryiko/cilium.git
Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Co-developed-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230219200427.606541-2-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
BPF_STX instruction preserves STACK_ZERO marks for variable offset
writes in situations like below:
*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = 0 ; STACK_ZERO marks for fp[-8]
r0 = random(-7, -1) ; some random number in range of [-7, -1]
r0 += r10 ; r0 is now a variable offset pointer to stack
r1 = 0
*(u8*)(r0) = r1 ; BPF_STX writing zero, STACK_ZERO mark for
; fp[-8] is preserved
This commit updates verifier.c:check_stack_write_var_off() to process
BPF_ST in a similar manner, e.g. the following example:
*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = 0 ; STACK_ZERO marks for fp[-8]
r0 = random(-7, -1) ; some random number in range of [-7, -1]
r0 += r10 ; r0 is now variable offset pointer to stack
*(u8*)(r0) = 0 ; BPF_ST writing zero, STACK_ZERO mark for
; fp[-8] is preserved
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230214232030.1502829-4-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>