From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
To: "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: [PATCH] bpf: prevent memory disambiguation attack
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 14:17:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180521211743.1492305-1-ast@kernel.org> (raw)
Detect code patterns where malicious 'speculative store bypass' can be used
and sanitize such patterns.
39: (bf) r3 = r10
40: (07) r3 += -216
41: (79) r8 = *(u64 *)(r7 +0) // slow read
42: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -72) = 0 // verifier inserts this instruction
43: (7b) *(u64 *)(r8 +0) = r3 // this store becomes slow due to r8
44: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r6 +0) // cpu speculatively executes this load
45: (71) r2 = *(u8 *)(r1 +0) // speculatively arbitrary 'load byte'
// is now sanitized
Above code after x86 JIT becomes:
e5: mov %rbp,%rdx
e8: add $0xffffffffffffff28,%rdx
ef: mov 0x0(%r13),%r14
f3: movq $0x0,-0x48(%rbp)
fb: mov %rdx,0x0(%r14)
ff: mov 0x0(%rbx),%rdi
103: movzbq 0x0(%rdi),%rsi
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
---
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 1 +
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index 7e61c395fddf..65cfc2f59db9 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -146,6 +146,7 @@ struct bpf_insn_aux_data {
s32 call_imm; /* saved imm field of call insn */
};
int ctx_field_size; /* the ctx field size for load insn, maybe 0 */
+ int sanitize_stack_off; /* stack slot to be cleared */
bool seen; /* this insn was processed by the verifier */
};
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 5dd1dcb902bf..2ce967a63ede 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -978,7 +978,7 @@ static bool register_is_null(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
*/
static int check_stack_write(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_func_state *state, /* func where register points to */
- int off, int size, int value_regno)
+ int off, int size, int value_regno, int insn_idx)
{
struct bpf_func_state *cur; /* state of the current function */
int i, slot = -off - 1, spi = slot / BPF_REG_SIZE, err;
@@ -1017,8 +1017,33 @@ static int check_stack_write(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr = cur->regs[value_regno];
state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.live |= REG_LIVE_WRITTEN;
- for (i = 0; i < BPF_REG_SIZE; i++)
+ for (i = 0; i < BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
+ if (state->stack[spi].slot_type[i] == STACK_MISC &&
+ !env->allow_ptr_leaks) {
+ int *poff = &env->insn_aux_data[insn_idx].sanitize_stack_off;
+ int soff = (-spi - 1) * BPF_REG_SIZE;
+
+ /* detected reuse of integer stack slot with a pointer
+ * which means either llvm is reusing stack slot or
+ * an attacker is trying to exploit CVE-2018-3639
+ * (speculative store bypass)
+ * Have to sanitize that slot with preemptive
+ * store of zero.
+ */
+ if (*poff && *poff != soff) {
+ /* disallow programs where single insn stores
+ * into two different stack slots, since verifier
+ * cannot sanitize them
+ */
+ verbose(env,
+ "insn %d cannot access two stack slots fp%d and fp%d",
+ insn_idx, *poff, soff);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ *poff = soff;
+ }
state->stack[spi].slot_type[i] = STACK_SPILL;
+ }
} else {
u8 type = STACK_MISC;
@@ -1694,7 +1719,7 @@ static int check_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, u32 regn
if (t == BPF_WRITE)
err = check_stack_write(env, state, off, size,
- value_regno);
+ value_regno, insn_idx);
else
err = check_stack_read(env, state, off, size,
value_regno);
@@ -5169,6 +5194,34 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
else
continue;
+ if (type == BPF_WRITE &&
+ env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].sanitize_stack_off) {
+ struct bpf_insn patch[] = {
+ /* Sanitize suspicious stack slot with zero.
+ * There are no memory dependencies for this store,
+ * since it's only using frame pointer and immediate
+ * constant of zero
+ */
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP,
+ env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].sanitize_stack_off,
+ 0),
+ /* the original STX instruction will immediately
+ * overwrite the same stack slot with appropriate value
+ */
+ *insn,
+ };
+
+ cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(patch);
+ new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, patch, cnt);
+ if (!new_prog)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ delta += cnt - 1;
+ env->prog = new_prog;
+ insn = new_prog->insnsi + i + delta;
+ continue;
+ }
+
if (env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].ptr_type != PTR_TO_CTX)
continue;
--
2.9.5
next reply other threads:[~2018-05-21 21:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-21 21:17 Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2018-05-21 21:46 ` [PATCH] bpf: prevent memory disambiguation attack Daniel Borkmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180521211743.1492305-1-ast@kernel.org \
--to=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.