linux-stable.git/kernel/bpf, branch v5.4.243 Linux kernel stable tree bpf: Don't EFAULT for getsockopt with optval=NULL 2023-05-17T09:35:44+00:00 Stanislav Fomichev sdf@google.com 2023-04-18T22:53:38+00:00 64d2c1cfd04f411b35e907391ef389dc2c810842 [ Upstream commit 00e74ae0863827d944e36e56a4ce1e77e50edb91 ] Some socket options do getsockopt with optval=NULL to estimate the size of the final buffer (which is returned via optlen). This breaks BPF getsockopt assumptions about permitted optval buffer size. Let's enforce these assumptions only when non-NULL optval is provided. Fixes: 0d01da6afc54 ("bpf: implement getsockopt and setsockopt hooks") Reported-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZD7Js4fj5YyI2oLd@google.com/T/#mb68daf700f87a9244a15d01d00c3f0e5b08f49f7 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230418225343.553806-2-sdf@google.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 00e74ae0863827d944e36e56a4ce1e77e50edb91 ]

Some socket options do getsockopt with optval=NULL to estimate the size
of the final buffer (which is returned via optlen). This breaks BPF
getsockopt assumptions about permitted optval buffer size. Let's enforce
these assumptions only when non-NULL optval is provided.

Fixes: 0d01da6afc54 ("bpf: implement getsockopt and setsockopt hooks")
Reported-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZD7Js4fj5YyI2oLd@google.com/T/#mb68daf700f87a9244a15d01d00c3f0e5b08f49f7
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230418225343.553806-2-sdf@google.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
bpf: Fix incorrect verifier pruning due to missing register precision taints 2023-04-26T09:24:02+00:00 Daniel Borkmann daniel@iogearbox.net 2023-04-11T15:24:13+00:00 0f0a291cc5208dcc6436974246e8c18106e3c3d2 [ Upstream commit 71b547f561247897a0a14f3082730156c0533fed ] 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> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 71b547f561247897a0a14f3082730156c0533fed ]

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>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
bpf: Adjust insufficient default bpf_jit_limit 2023-04-05T09:16:37+00:00 Daniel Borkmann daniel@iogearbox.net 2023-03-20T14:37:25+00:00 d69c2ded95b17d51cc6632c7848cbd476381ecd6 [ Upstream commit 10ec8ca8ec1a2f04c4ed90897225231c58c124a7 ] We've seen recent AWS EKS (Kubernetes) user reports like the following: After upgrading EKS nodes from v20230203 to v20230217 on our 1.24 EKS clusters after a few days a number of the nodes have containers stuck in ContainerCreating state or liveness/readiness probes reporting the following error: Readiness probe errored: rpc error: code = Unknown desc = failed to exec in container: failed to start exec "4a11039f730203ffc003b7[...]": OCI runtime exec failed: exec failed: unable to start container process: unable to init seccomp: error loading seccomp filter into kernel: error loading seccomp filter: errno 524: unknown However, we had not been seeing this issue on previous AMIs and it only started to occur on v20230217 (following the upgrade from kernel 5.4 to 5.10) with no other changes to the underlying cluster or workloads. We tried the suggestions from that issue (sysctl net.core.bpf_jit_limit=452534528) which helped to immediately allow containers to be created and probes to execute but after approximately a day the issue returned and the value returned by cat /proc/vmallocinfo | grep bpf_jit | awk '{s+=$2} END {print s}' was steadily increasing. I tested bpf tree to observe bpf_jit_charge_modmem, bpf_jit_uncharge_modmem their sizes passed in as well as bpf_jit_current under tcpdump BPF filter, seccomp BPF and native (e)BPF programs, and the behavior all looks sane and expected, that is nothing "leaking" from an upstream perspective. The bpf_jit_limit knob was originally added in order to avoid a situation where unprivileged applications loading BPF programs (e.g. seccomp BPF policies) consuming all the module memory space via BPF JIT such that loading of kernel modules would be prevented. The default limit was defined back in 2018 and while good enough back then, we are generally seeing far more BPF consumers today. Adjust the limit for the BPF JIT pool from originally 1/4 to now 1/2 of the module memory space to better reflect today's needs and avoid more users running into potentially hard to debug issues. Fixes: fdadd04931c2 ("bpf: fix bpf_jit_limit knob for PAGE_SIZE >= 64K") Reported-by: Stephen Haynes <sh@synk.net> Reported-by: Lefteris Alexakis <lefteris.alexakis@kpn.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://github.com/awslabs/amazon-eks-ami/issues/1179 Link: https://github.com/awslabs/amazon-eks-ami/issues/1219 Reviewed-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230320143725.8394-1-daniel@iogearbox.net Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 10ec8ca8ec1a2f04c4ed90897225231c58c124a7 ]

We've seen recent AWS EKS (Kubernetes) user reports like the following:

  After upgrading EKS nodes from v20230203 to v20230217 on our 1.24 EKS
  clusters after a few days a number of the nodes have containers stuck
  in ContainerCreating state or liveness/readiness probes reporting the
  following error:

    Readiness probe errored: rpc error: code = Unknown desc = failed to
    exec in container: failed to start exec "4a11039f730203ffc003b7[...]":
    OCI runtime exec failed: exec failed: unable to start container process:
    unable to init seccomp: error loading seccomp filter into kernel:
    error loading seccomp filter: errno 524: unknown

  However, we had not been seeing this issue on previous AMIs and it only
  started to occur on v20230217 (following the upgrade from kernel 5.4 to
  5.10) with no other changes to the underlying cluster or workloads.

  We tried the suggestions from that issue (sysctl net.core.bpf_jit_limit=452534528)
  which helped to immediately allow containers to be created and probes to
  execute but after approximately a day the issue returned and the value
  returned by cat /proc/vmallocinfo | grep bpf_jit | awk '{s+=$2} END {print s}'
  was steadily increasing.

I tested bpf tree to observe bpf_jit_charge_modmem, bpf_jit_uncharge_modmem
their sizes passed in as well as bpf_jit_current under tcpdump BPF filter,
seccomp BPF and native (e)BPF programs, and the behavior all looks sane
and expected, that is nothing "leaking" from an upstream perspective.

The bpf_jit_limit knob was originally added in order to avoid a situation
where unprivileged applications loading BPF programs (e.g. seccomp BPF
policies) consuming all the module memory space via BPF JIT such that loading
of kernel modules would be prevented. The default limit was defined back in
2018 and while good enough back then, we are generally seeing far more BPF
consumers today.

Adjust the limit for the BPF JIT pool from originally 1/4 to now 1/2 of the
module memory space to better reflect today's needs and avoid more users
running into potentially hard to debug issues.

Fixes: fdadd04931c2 ("bpf: fix bpf_jit_limit knob for PAGE_SIZE >= 64K")
Reported-by: Stephen Haynes <sh@synk.net>
Reported-by: Lefteris Alexakis <lefteris.alexakis@kpn.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://github.com/awslabs/amazon-eks-ami/issues/1179
Link: https://github.com/awslabs/amazon-eks-ami/issues/1219
Reviewed-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230320143725.8394-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
btf: fix resolving BTF_KIND_VAR after ARRAY, STRUCT, UNION, PTR 2023-03-17T07:32:51+00:00 Lorenz Bauer lorenz.bauer@isovalent.com 2023-03-06T11:21:37+00:00 d800996fcf604adf28f11fa7836bdf9a1e09f436 [ Upstream commit 9b459804ff9973e173fabafba2a1319f771e85fa ] btf_datasec_resolve contains a bug that causes the following BTF to fail loading: [1] DATASEC a size=2 vlen=2 type_id=4 offset=0 size=1 type_id=7 offset=1 size=1 [2] INT (anon) size=1 bits_offset=0 nr_bits=8 encoding=(none) [3] PTR (anon) type_id=2 [4] VAR a type_id=3 linkage=0 [5] INT (anon) size=1 bits_offset=0 nr_bits=8 encoding=(none) [6] TYPEDEF td type_id=5 [7] VAR b type_id=6 linkage=0 This error message is printed during btf_check_all_types: [1] DATASEC a size=2 vlen=2 type_id=7 offset=1 size=1 Invalid type By tracing btf_*_resolve we can pinpoint the problem: btf_datasec_resolve(depth: 1, type_id: 1, mode: RESOLVE_TBD) = 0 btf_var_resolve(depth: 2, type_id: 4, mode: RESOLVE_TBD) = 0 btf_ptr_resolve(depth: 3, type_id: 3, mode: RESOLVE_PTR) = 0 btf_var_resolve(depth: 2, type_id: 4, mode: RESOLVE_PTR) = 0 btf_datasec_resolve(depth: 1, type_id: 1, mode: RESOLVE_PTR) = -22 The last invocation of btf_datasec_resolve should invoke btf_var_resolve by means of env_stack_push, instead it returns EINVAL. The reason is that env_stack_push is never executed for the second VAR. if (!env_type_is_resolve_sink(env, var_type) && !env_type_is_resolved(env, var_type_id)) { env_stack_set_next_member(env, i + 1); return env_stack_push(env, var_type, var_type_id); } env_type_is_resolve_sink() changes its behaviour based on resolve_mode. For RESOLVE_PTR, we can simplify the if condition to the following: (btf_type_is_modifier() || btf_type_is_ptr) && !env_type_is_resolved() Since we're dealing with a VAR the clause evaluates to false. This is not sufficient to trigger the bug however. The log output and EINVAL are only generated if btf_type_id_size() fails. if (!btf_type_id_size(btf, &type_id, &type_size)) { btf_verifier_log_vsi(env, v->t, vsi, "Invalid type"); return -EINVAL; } Most types are sized, so for example a VAR referring to an INT is not a problem. The bug is only triggered if a VAR points at a modifier. Since we skipped btf_var_resolve that modifier was also never resolved, which means that btf_resolved_type_id returns 0 aka VOID for the modifier. This in turn causes btf_type_id_size to return NULL, triggering EINVAL. To summarise, the following conditions are necessary: - VAR pointing at PTR, STRUCT, UNION or ARRAY - Followed by a VAR pointing at TYPEDEF, VOLATILE, CONST, RESTRICT or TYPE_TAG The fix is to reset resolve_mode to RESOLVE_TBD before attempting to resolve a VAR from a DATASEC. Fixes: 1dc92851849c ("bpf: kernel side support for BTF Var and DataSec") Signed-off-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@isovalent.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230306112138.155352-2-lmb@isovalent.com Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 9b459804ff9973e173fabafba2a1319f771e85fa ]

btf_datasec_resolve contains a bug that causes the following BTF
to fail loading:

    [1] DATASEC a size=2 vlen=2
        type_id=4 offset=0 size=1
        type_id=7 offset=1 size=1
    [2] INT (anon) size=1 bits_offset=0 nr_bits=8 encoding=(none)
    [3] PTR (anon) type_id=2
    [4] VAR a type_id=3 linkage=0
    [5] INT (anon) size=1 bits_offset=0 nr_bits=8 encoding=(none)
    [6] TYPEDEF td type_id=5
    [7] VAR b type_id=6 linkage=0

This error message is printed during btf_check_all_types:

    [1] DATASEC a size=2 vlen=2
        type_id=7 offset=1 size=1 Invalid type

By tracing btf_*_resolve we can pinpoint the problem:

    btf_datasec_resolve(depth: 1, type_id: 1, mode: RESOLVE_TBD) = 0
        btf_var_resolve(depth: 2, type_id: 4, mode: RESOLVE_TBD) = 0
            btf_ptr_resolve(depth: 3, type_id: 3, mode: RESOLVE_PTR) = 0
        btf_var_resolve(depth: 2, type_id: 4, mode: RESOLVE_PTR) = 0
    btf_datasec_resolve(depth: 1, type_id: 1, mode: RESOLVE_PTR) = -22

The last invocation of btf_datasec_resolve should invoke btf_var_resolve
by means of env_stack_push, instead it returns EINVAL. The reason is that
env_stack_push is never executed for the second VAR.

    if (!env_type_is_resolve_sink(env, var_type) &&
        !env_type_is_resolved(env, var_type_id)) {
        env_stack_set_next_member(env, i + 1);
        return env_stack_push(env, var_type, var_type_id);
    }

env_type_is_resolve_sink() changes its behaviour based on resolve_mode.
For RESOLVE_PTR, we can simplify the if condition to the following:

    (btf_type_is_modifier() || btf_type_is_ptr) && !env_type_is_resolved()

Since we're dealing with a VAR the clause evaluates to false. This is
not sufficient to trigger the bug however. The log output and EINVAL
are only generated if btf_type_id_size() fails.

    if (!btf_type_id_size(btf, &type_id, &type_size)) {
        btf_verifier_log_vsi(env, v->t, vsi, "Invalid type");
        return -EINVAL;
    }

Most types are sized, so for example a VAR referring to an INT is not a
problem. The bug is only triggered if a VAR points at a modifier. Since
we skipped btf_var_resolve that modifier was also never resolved, which
means that btf_resolved_type_id returns 0 aka VOID for the modifier.
This in turn causes btf_type_id_size to return NULL, triggering EINVAL.

To summarise, the following conditions are necessary:

- VAR pointing at PTR, STRUCT, UNION or ARRAY
- Followed by a VAR pointing at TYPEDEF, VOLATILE, CONST, RESTRICT or
  TYPE_TAG

The fix is to reset resolve_mode to RESOLVE_TBD before attempting to
resolve a VAR from a DATASEC.

Fixes: 1dc92851849c ("bpf: kernel side support for BTF Var and DataSec")
Signed-off-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@isovalent.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230306112138.155352-2-lmb@isovalent.com
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
bpf: add missing header file include 2023-02-25T10:53:27+00:00 Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org 2023-02-22T17:52:32+00:00 c6cc0121d44d4f8dcde65fec71eb1ee8915392ed commit f3dd0c53370e70c0f9b7e931bbec12916f3bb8cc upstream. Commit 74e19ef0ff80 ("uaccess: Add speculation barrier to copy_from_user()") built fine on x86-64 and arm64, and that's the extent of my local build testing. It turns out those got the <linux/nospec.h> include incidentally through other header files (<linux/kvm_host.h> in particular), but that was not true of other architectures, resulting in build errors kernel/bpf/core.c: In function ‘___bpf_prog_run’: kernel/bpf/core.c:1913:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘barrier_nospec’ so just make sure to explicitly include the proper <linux/nospec.h> header file to make everybody see it. Fixes: 74e19ef0ff80 ("uaccess: Add speculation barrier to copy_from_user()") Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Reported-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reported-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Tested-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit f3dd0c53370e70c0f9b7e931bbec12916f3bb8cc upstream.

Commit 74e19ef0ff80 ("uaccess: Add speculation barrier to
copy_from_user()") built fine on x86-64 and arm64, and that's the extent
of my local build testing.

It turns out those got the <linux/nospec.h> include incidentally through
other header files (<linux/kvm_host.h> in particular), but that was not
true of other architectures, resulting in build errors

  kernel/bpf/core.c: In function ‘___bpf_prog_run’:
  kernel/bpf/core.c:1913:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘barrier_nospec’

so just make sure to explicitly include the proper <linux/nospec.h>
header file to make everybody see it.

Fixes: 74e19ef0ff80 ("uaccess: Add speculation barrier to copy_from_user()")
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn>
Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Tested-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
uaccess: Add speculation barrier to copy_from_user() 2023-02-25T10:53:26+00:00 Dave Hansen dave.hansen@linux.intel.com 2023-02-21T20:30:15+00:00 6c750ed0367f6bf1b09c0c353a701781ee05dd22 commit 74e19ef0ff8061ef55957c3abd71614ef0f42f47 upstream. The results of "access_ok()" can be mis-speculated. The result is that you can end speculatively: if (access_ok(from, size)) // Right here even for bad from/size combinations. On first glance, it would be ideal to just add a speculation barrier to "access_ok()" so that its results can never be mis-speculated. But there are lots of system calls just doing access_ok() via "copy_to_user()" and friends (example: fstat() and friends). Those are generally not problematic because they do not _consume_ data from userspace other than the pointer. They are also very quick and common system calls that should not be needlessly slowed down. "copy_from_user()" on the other hand uses a user-controller pointer and is frequently followed up with code that might affect caches. Take something like this: if (!copy_from_user(&kernelvar, uptr, size)) do_something_with(kernelvar); If userspace passes in an evil 'uptr' that *actually* points to a kernel addresses, and then do_something_with() has cache (or other) side-effects, it could allow userspace to infer kernel data values. Add a barrier to the common copy_from_user() code to prevent mis-speculated values which happen after the copy. Also add a stub for architectures that do not define barrier_nospec(). This makes the macro usable in generic code. Since the barrier is now usable in generic code, the x86 #ifdef in the BPF code can also go away. Reported-by: Jordy Zomer <jordyzomer@google.com> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> # BPF bits Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 74e19ef0ff8061ef55957c3abd71614ef0f42f47 upstream.

The results of "access_ok()" can be mis-speculated.  The result is that
you can end speculatively:

	if (access_ok(from, size))
		// Right here

even for bad from/size combinations.  On first glance, it would be ideal
to just add a speculation barrier to "access_ok()" so that its results
can never be mis-speculated.

But there are lots of system calls just doing access_ok() via
"copy_to_user()" and friends (example: fstat() and friends).  Those are
generally not problematic because they do not _consume_ data from
userspace other than the pointer.  They are also very quick and common
system calls that should not be needlessly slowed down.

"copy_from_user()" on the other hand uses a user-controller pointer and
is frequently followed up with code that might affect caches.  Take
something like this:

	if (!copy_from_user(&kernelvar, uptr, size))
		do_something_with(kernelvar);

If userspace passes in an evil 'uptr' that *actually* points to a kernel
addresses, and then do_something_with() has cache (or other)
side-effects, it could allow userspace to infer kernel data values.

Add a barrier to the common copy_from_user() code to prevent
mis-speculated values which happen after the copy.

Also add a stub for architectures that do not define barrier_nospec().
This makes the macro usable in generic code.

Since the barrier is now usable in generic code, the x86 #ifdef in the
BPF code can also go away.

Reported-by: Jordy Zomer <jordyzomer@google.com>
Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>   # BPF bits
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
bpf: Fix pointer-leak due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation 2023-02-06T06:52:36+00:00 Luis Gerhorst gerhorst@cs.fau.de 2023-01-09T15:05:46+00:00 81b3374944d201872cfcf82730a7860f8e7c31dd [ Upstream commit e4f4db47794c9f474b184ee1418f42e6a07412b6 ] To mitigate Spectre v4, 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation") inserts lfence instructions after 1) initializing a stack slot and 2) spilling a pointer to the stack. However, this does not cover cases where a stack slot is first initialized with a pointer (subject to sanitization) but then overwritten with a scalar (not subject to sanitization because the slot was already initialized). In this case, the second write may be subject to speculative store bypass (SSB) creating a speculative pointer-as-scalar type confusion. This allows the program to subsequently leak the numerical pointer value using, for example, a branch-based cache side channel. To fix this, also sanitize scalars if they write a stack slot that previously contained a pointer. Assuming that pointer-spills are only generated by LLVM on register-pressure, the performance impact on most real-world BPF programs should be small. The following unprivileged BPF bytecode drafts a minimal exploit and the mitigation: [...] // r6 = 0 or 1 (skalar, unknown user input) // r7 = accessible ptr for side channel // r10 = frame pointer (fp), to be leaked // r9 = r10 # fp alias to encourage ssb *(u64 *)(r9 - 8) = r10 // fp[-8] = ptr, to be leaked // lfence added here because of pointer spill to stack. // // Ommitted: Dummy bpf_ringbuf_output() here to train alias predictor // for no r9-r10 dependency. // *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r6 // fp[-8] = scalar, overwrites ptr // 2039f26f3aca: no lfence added because stack slot was not STACK_INVALID, // store may be subject to SSB // // fix: also add an lfence when the slot contained a ptr // r8 = *(u64 *)(r9 - 8) // r8 = architecturally a scalar, speculatively a ptr // // leak ptr using branch-based cache side channel: r8 &= 1 // choose bit to leak if r8 == 0 goto SLOW // no mispredict // architecturally dead code if input r6 is 0, // only executes speculatively iff ptr bit is 1 r8 = *(u64 *)(r7 + 0) # encode bit in cache (0: slow, 1: fast) SLOW: [...] After running this, the program can time the access to *(r7 + 0) to determine whether the chosen pointer bit was 0 or 1. Repeat this 64 times to recover the whole address on amd64. In summary, sanitization can only be skipped if one scalar is overwritten with another scalar. Scalar-confusion due to speculative store bypass can not lead to invalid accesses because the pointer bounds deducted during verification are enforced using branchless logic. See 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on pointer arithmetic") for details. Do not make the mitigation depend on !env->allow_{uninit_stack,ptr_leaks} because speculative leaks are likely unexpected if these were enabled. For example, leaking the address to a protected log file may be acceptable while disabling the mitigation might unintentionally leak the address into the cached-state of a map that is accessible to unprivileged processes. Fixes: 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation") Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst <gerhorst@cs.fau.de> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Henriette Hofmeier <henriette.hofmeier@rub.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/edc95bad-aada-9cfc-ffe2-fa9bb206583c@cs.fau.de Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230109150544.41465-1-gerhorst@cs.fau.de Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit e4f4db47794c9f474b184ee1418f42e6a07412b6 ]

To mitigate Spectre v4, 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to
insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation") inserts lfence
instructions after 1) initializing a stack slot and 2) spilling a
pointer to the stack.

However, this does not cover cases where a stack slot is first
initialized with a pointer (subject to sanitization) but then
overwritten with a scalar (not subject to sanitization because
the slot was already initialized). In this case, the second write
may be subject to speculative store bypass (SSB) creating a
speculative pointer-as-scalar type confusion. This allows the
program to subsequently leak the numerical pointer value using,
for example, a branch-based cache side channel.

To fix this, also sanitize scalars if they write a stack slot
that previously contained a pointer. Assuming that pointer-spills
are only generated by LLVM on register-pressure, the performance
impact on most real-world BPF programs should be small.

The following unprivileged BPF bytecode drafts a minimal exploit
and the mitigation:

  [...]
  // r6 = 0 or 1 (skalar, unknown user input)
  // r7 = accessible ptr for side channel
  // r10 = frame pointer (fp), to be leaked
  //
  r9 = r10 # fp alias to encourage ssb
  *(u64 *)(r9 - 8) = r10 // fp[-8] = ptr, to be leaked
  // lfence added here because of pointer spill to stack.
  //
  // Ommitted: Dummy bpf_ringbuf_output() here to train alias predictor
  // for no r9-r10 dependency.
  //
  *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r6 // fp[-8] = scalar, overwrites ptr
  // 2039f26f3aca: no lfence added because stack slot was not STACK_INVALID,
  // store may be subject to SSB
  //
  // fix: also add an lfence when the slot contained a ptr
  //
  r8 = *(u64 *)(r9 - 8)
  // r8 = architecturally a scalar, speculatively a ptr
  //
  // leak ptr using branch-based cache side channel:
  r8 &= 1 // choose bit to leak
  if r8 == 0 goto SLOW // no mispredict
  // architecturally dead code if input r6 is 0,
  // only executes speculatively iff ptr bit is 1
  r8 = *(u64 *)(r7 + 0) # encode bit in cache (0: slow, 1: fast)
SLOW:
  [...]

After running this, the program can time the access to *(r7 + 0) to
determine whether the chosen pointer bit was 0 or 1. Repeat this 64
times to recover the whole address on amd64.

In summary, sanitization can only be skipped if one scalar is
overwritten with another scalar. Scalar-confusion due to speculative
store bypass can not lead to invalid accesses because the pointer
bounds deducted during verification are enforced using branchless
logic. See 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on
pointer arithmetic") for details.

Do not make the mitigation depend on !env->allow_{uninit_stack,ptr_leaks}
because speculative leaks are likely unexpected if these were enabled.
For example, leaking the address to a protected log file may be acceptable
while disabling the mitigation might unintentionally leak the address
into the cached-state of a map that is accessible to unprivileged
processes.

Fixes: 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation")
Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst <gerhorst@cs.fau.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Henriette Hofmeier <henriette.hofmeier@rub.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/edc95bad-aada-9cfc-ffe2-fa9bb206583c@cs.fau.de
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230109150544.41465-1-gerhorst@cs.fau.de
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
bpf: Prevent decl_tag from being referenced in func_proto arg 2023-01-18T10:41:37+00:00 Stanislav Fomichev sdf@google.com 2022-11-23T03:54:22+00:00 89357aa97b521fca76e39d81e2b1ac5edb3d0b96 [ Upstream commit f17472d4599697d701aa239b4c475a506bccfd19 ] Syzkaller managed to hit another decl_tag issue: btf_func_proto_check kernel/bpf/btf.c:4506 [inline] btf_check_all_types kernel/bpf/btf.c:4734 [inline] btf_parse_type_sec+0x1175/0x1980 kernel/bpf/btf.c:4763 btf_parse kernel/bpf/btf.c:5042 [inline] btf_new_fd+0x65a/0xb00 kernel/bpf/btf.c:6709 bpf_btf_load+0x6f/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4342 __sys_bpf+0x50a/0x6c0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5034 __do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5093 [inline] __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5091 [inline] __x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5091 do_syscall_64+0x54/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:48 This seems similar to commit ea68376c8bed ("bpf: prevent decl_tag from being referenced in func_proto") but for the argument. Reported-by: syzbot+8dd0551dda6020944c5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221123035422.872531-2-sdf@google.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit f17472d4599697d701aa239b4c475a506bccfd19 ]

Syzkaller managed to hit another decl_tag issue:

  btf_func_proto_check kernel/bpf/btf.c:4506 [inline]
  btf_check_all_types kernel/bpf/btf.c:4734 [inline]
  btf_parse_type_sec+0x1175/0x1980 kernel/bpf/btf.c:4763
  btf_parse kernel/bpf/btf.c:5042 [inline]
  btf_new_fd+0x65a/0xb00 kernel/bpf/btf.c:6709
  bpf_btf_load+0x6f/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4342
  __sys_bpf+0x50a/0x6c0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5034
  __do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5093 [inline]
  __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5091 [inline]
  __x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5091
  do_syscall_64+0x54/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:48

This seems similar to commit ea68376c8bed ("bpf: prevent decl_tag from being
referenced in func_proto") but for the argument.

Reported-by: syzbot+8dd0551dda6020944c5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221123035422.872531-2-sdf@google.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
bpf: propagate precision in ALU/ALU64 operations 2023-01-18T10:41:02+00:00 Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org 2022-11-04T16:36:44+00:00 d70fa0a6ce74c18cec191e6c9f93d81a13a92f69 [ Upstream commit a3b666bfa9c9edc05bca62a87abafe0936bd7f97 ] When processing ALU/ALU64 operations (apart from BPF_MOV, which is handled correctly already; and BPF_NEG and BPF_END are special and don't have source register), if destination register is already marked precise, this causes problem with potentially missing precision tracking for the source register. E.g., when we have r1 >>= r5 and r1 is marked precise, but r5 isn't, this will lead to r5 staying as imprecise. This is due to the precision backtracking logic stopping early when it sees r1 is already marked precise. If r1 wasn't precise, we'd keep backtracking and would add r5 to the set of registers that need to be marked precise. So there is a discrepancy here which can lead to invalid and incompatible states matched due to lack of precision marking on r5. If r1 wasn't precise, precision backtracking would correctly mark both r1 and r5 as precise. This is simple to fix, though. During the forward instruction simulation pass, for arithmetic operations of `scalar <op>= scalar` form (where <op> is ALU or ALU64 operations), if destination register is already precise, mark source register as precise. This applies only when both involved registers are SCALARs. `ptr += scalar` and `scalar += ptr` cases are already handled correctly. This does have (negative) effect on some selftest programs and few Cilium programs. ~/baseline-tmp-results.csv are veristat results with this patch, while ~/baseline-results.csv is without it. See post scriptum for instructions on how to make Cilium programs testable with veristat. Correctness has a price. $ ./veristat -C -e file,prog,insns,states ~/baseline-results.csv ~/baseline-tmp-results.csv | grep -v '+0' File Program Total insns (A) Total insns (B) Total insns (DIFF) Total states (A) Total states (B) Total states (DIFF) ----------------------- -------------------- --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- ------------------- bpf_cubic.bpf.linked1.o bpf_cubic_cong_avoid 997 1700 +703 (+70.51%) 62 90 +28 (+45.16%) test_l4lb.bpf.linked1.o balancer_ingress 4559 5469 +910 (+19.96%) 118 126 +8 (+6.78%) ----------------------- -------------------- --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- ------------------- $ ./veristat -C -e file,prog,verdict,insns,states ~/baseline-results-cilium.csv ~/baseline-tmp-results-cilium.csv | grep -v '+0' File Program Total insns (A) Total insns (B) Total insns (DIFF) Total states (A) Total states (B) Total states (DIFF) ------------- ------------------------------ --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- ------------------- bpf_host.o tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6 4448 5261 +813 (+18.28%) 234 247 +13 (+5.56%) bpf_host.o tail_nodeport_nat_ipv6_egress 3396 3446 +50 (+1.47%) 201 203 +2 (+1.00%) bpf_lxc.o tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6 4448 5261 +813 (+18.28%) 234 247 +13 (+5.56%) bpf_overlay.o tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6 4448 5261 +813 (+18.28%) 234 247 +13 (+5.56%) bpf_xdp.o tail_lb_ipv4 71736 73442 +1706 (+2.38%) 4295 4370 +75 (+1.75%) ------------- ------------------------------ --------------- --------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- ------------------- P.S. To make Cilium ([0]) programs libbpf-compatible and thus veristat-loadable, apply changes from topmost commit in [1], which does minimal changes to Cilium source code, mostly around SEC() annotations and BPF map definitions. [0] https://github.com/cilium/cilium/ [1] https://github.com/anakryiko/cilium/commits/libbpf-friendliness Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking") Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221104163649.121784-2-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit a3b666bfa9c9edc05bca62a87abafe0936bd7f97 ]

When processing ALU/ALU64 operations (apart from BPF_MOV, which is
handled correctly already; and BPF_NEG and BPF_END are special and don't
have source register), if destination register is already marked
precise, this causes problem with potentially missing precision tracking
for the source register. E.g., when we have r1 >>= r5 and r1 is marked
precise, but r5 isn't, this will lead to r5 staying as imprecise. This
is due to the precision backtracking logic stopping early when it sees
r1 is already marked precise. If r1 wasn't precise, we'd keep
backtracking and would add r5 to the set of registers that need to be
marked precise. So there is a discrepancy here which can lead to invalid
and incompatible states matched due to lack of precision marking on r5.
If r1 wasn't precise, precision backtracking would correctly mark both
r1 and r5 as precise.

This is simple to fix, though. During the forward instruction simulation
pass, for arithmetic operations of `scalar <op>= scalar` form (where
<op> is ALU or ALU64 operations), if destination register is already
precise, mark source register as precise. This applies only when both
involved registers are SCALARs. `ptr += scalar` and `scalar += ptr`
cases are already handled correctly.

This does have (negative) effect on some selftest programs and few
Cilium programs.  ~/baseline-tmp-results.csv are veristat results with
this patch, while ~/baseline-results.csv is without it. See post
scriptum for instructions on how to make Cilium programs testable with
veristat. Correctness has a price.

$ ./veristat -C -e file,prog,insns,states ~/baseline-results.csv ~/baseline-tmp-results.csv | grep -v '+0'
File                     Program               Total insns (A)  Total insns (B)  Total insns (DIFF)  Total states (A)  Total states (B)  Total states (DIFF)
-----------------------  --------------------  ---------------  ---------------  ------------------  ----------------  ----------------  -------------------
bpf_cubic.bpf.linked1.o  bpf_cubic_cong_avoid              997             1700      +703 (+70.51%)                62                90        +28 (+45.16%)
test_l4lb.bpf.linked1.o  balancer_ingress                 4559             5469      +910 (+19.96%)               118               126          +8 (+6.78%)
-----------------------  --------------------  ---------------  ---------------  ------------------  ----------------  ----------------  -------------------

$ ./veristat -C -e file,prog,verdict,insns,states ~/baseline-results-cilium.csv ~/baseline-tmp-results-cilium.csv | grep -v '+0'
File           Program                         Total insns (A)  Total insns (B)  Total insns (DIFF)  Total states (A)  Total states (B)  Total states (DIFF)
-------------  ------------------------------  ---------------  ---------------  ------------------  ----------------  ----------------  -------------------
bpf_host.o     tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6             4448             5261      +813 (+18.28%)               234               247         +13 (+5.56%)
bpf_host.o     tail_nodeport_nat_ipv6_egress              3396             3446        +50 (+1.47%)               201               203          +2 (+1.00%)
bpf_lxc.o      tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6             4448             5261      +813 (+18.28%)               234               247         +13 (+5.56%)
bpf_overlay.o  tail_nodeport_nat_ingress_ipv6             4448             5261      +813 (+18.28%)               234               247         +13 (+5.56%)
bpf_xdp.o      tail_lb_ipv4                              71736            73442      +1706 (+2.38%)              4295              4370         +75 (+1.75%)
-------------  ------------------------------  ---------------  ---------------  ------------------  ----------------  ----------------  -------------------

P.S. To make Cilium ([0]) programs libbpf-compatible and thus
veristat-loadable, apply changes from topmost commit in [1], which does
minimal changes to Cilium source code, mostly around SEC() annotations
and BPF map definitions.

  [0] https://github.com/cilium/cilium/
  [1] https://github.com/anakryiko/cilium/commits/libbpf-friendliness

Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221104163649.121784-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
bpf: Ensure correct locking around vulnerable function find_vpid() 2022-10-26T11:22:24+00:00 Lee Jones lee@kernel.org 2022-09-12T13:38:55+00:00 215c146b402161c545475f736953494355384903 [ Upstream commit 83c10cc362d91c0d8d25e60779ee52fdbbf3894d ] The documentation for find_vpid() clearly states: "Must be called with the tasklist_lock or rcu_read_lock() held." Presently we do neither for find_vpid() instance in bpf_task_fd_query(). Add proper rcu_read_lock/unlock() to fix the issue. Fixes: 41bdc4b40ed6f ("bpf: introduce bpf subcommand BPF_TASK_FD_QUERY") Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220912133855.1218900-1-lee@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 83c10cc362d91c0d8d25e60779ee52fdbbf3894d ]

The documentation for find_vpid() clearly states:

  "Must be called with the tasklist_lock or rcu_read_lock() held."

Presently we do neither for find_vpid() instance in bpf_task_fd_query().
Add proper rcu_read_lock/unlock() to fix the issue.

Fixes: 41bdc4b40ed6f ("bpf: introduce bpf subcommand BPF_TASK_FD_QUERY")
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220912133855.1218900-1-lee@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>