linux-stable.git/kernel/bpf, branch v5.10.97

bpf: Guard against accessing NULL pt_regs in bpf_get_task_stack()

2022-02-01T16:25:38+00:00

commit b992f01e66150fc5e90be4a96f5eb8e634c8249e upstream.

task_pt_regs() can return NULL on powerpc for kernel threads. This is
then used in __bpf_get_stack() to check for user mode, resulting in a
kernel oops. Guard against this by checking return value of
task_pt_regs() before trying to obtain the call chain.

Fixes: fa28dcb82a38f8 ("bpf: Introduce helper bpf_get_task_stack()")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.9+
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao 
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/d5ef83c361cc255494afd15ff1b4fb02a36e1dcf.1641468127.git.naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Don't promote bogus looking registers after null check.

2022-01-27T09:54:00+00:00

[ Upstream commit e60b0d12a95dcf16a63225cead4541567f5cb517 ]

If we ever get to a point again where we convert a bogus looking _or_null
typed register containing a non-zero fixed or variable offset, then lets not
reset these bounds to zero since they are not and also don't promote the register
to a  type, but instead leave it as _or_null. Converting to a unknown
register could be an avenue as well, but then if we run into this case it would
allow to leak a kernel pointer this way.

Fixes: f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Disallow BPF_LOG_KERNEL log level for bpf(BPF_BTF_LOAD)

2022-01-27T09:53:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit 866de407444398bc8140ea70de1dba5f91cc34ac ]

BPF_LOG_KERNEL is only used internally, so disallow bpf_btf_load()
to set log level as BPF_LOG_KERNEL. The same checking has already
been done in bpf_check(), so factor out a helper to check the
validity of log attributes and use it in both places.

Fixes: 8580ac9404f6 ("bpf: Process in-kernel BTF")
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Acked-by: Yonghong Song 
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211203053001.740945-1-houtao1@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Adjust BTF log size limit.

2022-01-27T09:53:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit c5a2d43e998a821701029f23e25b62f9188e93ff ]

Make BTF log size limit to be the same as the verifier log size limit.
Otherwise tools that progressively increase log size and use the same log
for BTF loading and program loading will be hitting hard to debug EINVAL.

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211201181040.23337-7-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Fix out of bounds access from invalid *_or_null type verification

2022-01-16T08:14:22+00:00

[ no upstream commit given implicitly fixed through the larger refactoring
  in c25b2ae136039ffa820c26138ed4a5e5f3ab3841 ]

While auditing some other code, I noticed missing checks inside the pointer
arithmetic simulation, more specifically, adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(). Several
*_OR_NULL types are not rejected whereas they are _required_ to be rejected
given the expectation is that they get promoted into a 'real' pointer type
for the success case, that is, after an explicit != NULL check.

One case which stands out and is accessible from unprivileged (iff enabled
given disabled by default) is BPF ring buffer. From crafting a PoC, the NULL
check can be bypassed through an offset, and its id marking will then lead
to promotion of mem_or_null to a mem type.

bpf_ringbuf_reserve() helper can trigger this case through passing of reserved
flags, for example.

  func#0 @0
  0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
  1: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  1: (18) r1 = 0x0
  3: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  3: (b7) r2 = 8
  4: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP8 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  4: (b7) r3 = 0
  5: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP8 R3_w=invP0 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm
  5: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_reserve#131
  6: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  6: (bf) r6 = r0
  7: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  7: (07) r0 += 1
  8: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=1,imm=0) R6_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  8: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+4
   R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  9: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  9: (62) *(u32 *)(r6 +0) = 0
   R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  10: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  10: (bf) r1 = r6
  11: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R1_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  11: (b7) r2 = 0
  12: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R1_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP0 R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2
  12: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_submit#132
  13: R6=invP(id=0) R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm
  13: (b7) r0 = 0
  14: R0_w=invP0 R6=invP(id=0) R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm
  14: (95) exit

  from 8 to 13: safe
  processed 15 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 1 peak_states 1 mark_read 0
  OK

All three commits, that is b121b341e598 ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support"),
457f44363a88 ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it"), and the
afbf21dce668 ("bpf: Support readonly/readwrite buffers in verifier") suffer the same
cause and their *_OR_NULL type pendants must be rejected in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals().

Make the test more robust by reusing reg_type_may_be_null() helper such that we catch
all *_OR_NULL types we have today and in future.

Note that pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_BTF_ID, PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF, and PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF
is generally allowed.

Fixes: b121b341e598 ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support")
Fixes: 457f44363a88 ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it")
Fixes: afbf21dce668 ("bpf: Support readonly/readwrite buffers in verifier")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Add kconfig knob for disabling unpriv bpf by default

2022-01-05T11:40:34+00:00

commit 08389d888287c3823f80b0216766b71e17f0aba5 upstream.

Add a kconfig knob which allows for unprivileged bpf to be disabled by default.
If set, the knob sets /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled to value of 2.

This still allows a transition of 2 -> {0,1} through an admin. Similarly,
this also still keeps 1 -> {1} behavior intact, so that once set to permanently
disabled, it cannot be undone aside from a reboot.

We've also added extra2 with max of 2 for the procfs handler, so that an admin
still has a chance to toggle between 0 <-> 2.

Either way, as an additional alternative, applications can make use of CAP_BPF
that we added a while ago.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/74ec548079189e4e4dffaeb42b8987bb3c852eee.1620765074.git.daniel@iogearbox.net
Cc: Salvatore Bonaccorso 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Make 32->64 bounds propagation slightly more robust

2021-12-22T08:30:50+00:00

commit e572ff80f05c33cd0cb4860f864f5c9c044280b6 upstream.

Make the bounds propagation in __reg_assign_32_into_64() slightly more
robust and readable by aligning it similarly as we did back in the
__reg_combine_64_into_32() counterpart. Meaning, only propagate or
pessimize them as a smin/smax pair.

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

bpf: Fix signed bounds propagation after mov32

2021-12-22T08:30:50+00:00

commit 3cf2b61eb06765e27fec6799292d9fb46d0b7e60 upstream.

For the case where both s32_{min,max}_value bounds are positive, the
__reg_assign_32_into_64() directly propagates them to their 64 bit
counterparts, otherwise it pessimises them into [0,u32_max] universe and
tries to refine them later on by learning through the tnum as per comment
in mentioned function. However, that does not always happen, for example,
in mov32 operation we call zext_32_to_64(dst_reg) which invokes the
__reg_assign_32_into_64() as is without subsequent bounds update as
elsewhere thus no refinement based on tnum takes place.

Thus, not calling into the __update_reg_bounds() / __reg_deduce_bounds() /
__reg_bound_offset() triplet as we do, for example, in case of ALU ops via
adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(), will lead to more pessimistic bounds when
dumping the full register state:

Before fix:

  0: (b4) w0 = -1
  1: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

  1: (bc) w0 = w0
  2: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

Technically, the smin_value=0 and smax_value=4294967295 bounds are not
incorrect, but given the register is still a constant, they break assumptions
about const scalars that smin_value == smax_value and umin_value == umax_value.

After fix:

  0: (b4) w0 = -1
  1: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

  1: (bc) w0 = w0
  2: R0_w=invP4294967295
     (id=0,imm=ffffffff,
      smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295,
      umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295,
      var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0),
      s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1,
      u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1)

Without the smin_value == smax_value and umin_value == umax_value invariant
being intact for const scalars, it is possible to leak out kernel pointers
from unprivileged user space if the latter is enabled. For example, when such
registers are involved in pointer arithmtics, then adjust_ptr_min_max_vals()
will taint the destination register into an unknown scalar, and the latter
can be exported and stored e.g. into a BPF map value.

Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Kuee K1r0a 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend 
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix integer overflow in argument calculation for bpf_map_area_alloc

2021-12-17T09:14:41+00:00

commit 7dd5d437c258bbf4cc15b35229e5208b87b8b4e0 upstream.

In 32-bit architecture, the result of sizeof() is a 32-bit integer so
the expression becomes the multiplication between 2 32-bit integer which
can potentially leads to integer overflow. As a result,
bpf_map_area_alloc() allocates less memory than needed.

Fix this by casting 1 operand to u64.

Fixes: 0d2c4f964050 ("bpf: Eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash maps")
Fixes: 99c51064fb06 ("devmap: Use bpf_map_area_alloc() for allocating hash buckets")
Fixes: 546ac1ffb70d ("bpf: add devmap, a map for storing net device references")
Signed-off-by: Bui Quang Minh 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210613143440.71975-1-minhquangbui99@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Connor O'Brien 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix the off-by-two error in range markings

2021-12-14T10:32:36+00:00

commit 2fa7d94afc1afbb4d702760c058dc2d7ed30f226 upstream.

The first commit cited below attempts to fix the off-by-one error that
appeared in some comparisons with an open range. Due to this error,
arithmetically equivalent pieces of code could get different verdicts
from the verifier, for example (pseudocode):

  // 1. Passes the verifier:
  if (data + 8 > data_end)
      return early
  read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]

  // 2. Rejected by the verifier (should still pass):
  if (data + 7 >= data_end)
      return early
  read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]

The attempted fix, however, shifts the range by one in a wrong
direction, so the bug not only remains, but also such piece of code
starts failing in the verifier:

  // 3. Rejected by the verifier, but the check is stricter than in #1.
  if (data + 8 >= data_end)
      return early
  read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]

The change performed by that fix converted an off-by-one bug into
off-by-two. The second commit cited below added the BPF selftests
written to ensure than code chunks like #3 are rejected, however,
they should be accepted.

This commit fixes the off-by-two error by adjusting new_range in the
right direction and fixes the tests by changing the range into the
one that should actually fail.

Fixes: fb2a311a31d3 ("bpf: fix off by one for range markings with L{T, E} patterns")
Fixes: b37242c773b2 ("bpf: add test cases to bpf selftests to cover all access tests")
Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211130181607.593149-1-maximmi@nvidia.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman