From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@iki.fi>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] x86: bpf_jit_comp: secure bpf jit against spraying attacks
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:23:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519FA1FC.8090102@iki.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1368844623.3301.142.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Hi Eric,
Peter talked to me about this BPF work to prevent JIT spraying attacks
in the beginning of this week and I took a look at your patch.
Some comments:
* Meta-comment about patch structure: why this was a one patch and not
two patches? It changes two things that are orthogonal to each other
(random offset, RW -> RO change).
* Should NX bit be turned on while JIT code is being prepared?
* How hard it would be to read value of bpf_func pointer? If attacker
is able to read that, it would compromise the whole randomization
scheme.
* I loved the socket creation trick in the blog post :) Are there any
plans to do something about it?
* How was minimum entropy of 128 bytes chose? The patch description
does not explain this in anyway although it seems like decent choice.
/Jarkko
On 17.05.2013 19:37, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
>
> hpa bringed into my attention some security related issues
> with BPF JIT on x86.
>
> This patch makes sure the bpf generated code is marked read only,
> as other kernel text sections.
>
> It also splits the unused space (we vmalloc() and only use a fraction of
> the page) in two parts, so that the generated bpf code not starts at a
> known offset in the page, but a pseudo random one.
>
> Refs:
> http://mainisusuallyafunction.blogspot.com/2012/11/attacking-hardened-linux-systems-with.html
>
> Reported-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> index c0212db..79c216a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> #include <linux/netdevice.h>
> #include <linux/filter.h>
> #include <linux/if_vlan.h>
> +#include <linux/random.h>
>
> /*
> * Conventions :
> @@ -144,6 +145,39 @@ static int pkt_type_offset(void)
> return -1;
> }
>
> +struct bpf_binary_header {
> + unsigned int pages;
> + /* Note : for security reasons, bpf code will follow a randomly
> + * sized amount of int3 instructions
> + */
> + u8 image[];
> +};
> +
> +static struct bpf_binary_header *bpf_alloc_binary(unsigned int proglen,
> + u8 **image_ptr)
> +{
> + unsigned int sz, hole;
> + struct bpf_binary_header *header;
> +
> + /* Most of BPF filters are really small,
> + * but if some of them fill a page, allow at least
> + * 128 extra bytes to insert a random section of int3
> + */
> + sz = round_up(proglen + sizeof(*header) + 128, PAGE_SIZE);
> + header = module_alloc(sz);
> + if (!header)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + memset(header, 0xcc, sz); /* fill whole space with int3 instructions */
> +
> + header->pages = sz / PAGE_SIZE;
> + hole = sz - (proglen + sizeof(*header));
> +
> + /* insert a random number of int3 instructions before BPF code */
> + *image_ptr = &header->image[prandom_u32() % hole];
> + return header;
> +}
> +
> void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> {
> u8 temp[64];
> @@ -153,6 +187,7 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *fp)
> int t_offset, f_offset;
> u8 t_op, f_op, seen = 0, pass;
> u8 *image = NULL;
> + struct bpf_binary_header *header = NULL;
> u8 *func;
> int pc_ret0 = -1; /* bpf index of first RET #0 instruction (if any) */
> unsigned int cleanup_addr; /* epilogue code offset */
> @@ -693,7 +728,7 @@ cond_branch: f_offset = addrs[i + filter[i].jf] - addrs[i];
> if (unlikely(proglen + ilen > oldproglen)) {
> pr_err("bpb_jit_compile fatal error\n");
> kfree(addrs);
> - module_free(NULL, image);
> + module_free(NULL, header);
> return;
> }
> memcpy(image + proglen, temp, ilen);
> @@ -717,8 +752,8 @@ cond_branch: f_offset = addrs[i + filter[i].jf] - addrs[i];
> break;
> }
> if (proglen == oldproglen) {
> - image = module_alloc(proglen);
> - if (!image)
> + header = bpf_alloc_binary(proglen, &image);
> + if (!header)
> goto out;
> }
> oldproglen = proglen;
> @@ -728,7 +763,8 @@ cond_branch: f_offset = addrs[i + filter[i].jf] - addrs[i];
> bpf_jit_dump(flen, proglen, pass, image);
>
> if (image) {
> - bpf_flush_icache(image, image + proglen);
> + bpf_flush_icache(header, image + proglen);
> + set_memory_ro((unsigned long)header, header->pages);
> fp->bpf_func = (void *)image;
> }
> out:
> @@ -738,6 +774,11 @@ out:
>
> void bpf_jit_free(struct sk_filter *fp)
> {
> - if (fp->bpf_func != sk_run_filter)
> - module_free(NULL, fp->bpf_func);
> + if (fp->bpf_func != sk_run_filter) {
> + unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)fp->bpf_func & PAGE_MASK;
> + struct bpf_binary_header *header = (void *)addr;
> +
> + set_memory_rw(addr, header->pages);
> + module_free(NULL, header);
> + }
> }
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-24 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-18 2:37 [PATCH net-next] x86: bpf_jit_comp: secure bpf jit against spraying attacks Eric Dumazet
2013-05-19 17:02 ` Daniel Borkmann
2013-05-20 6:55 ` David Miller
2013-05-20 6:56 ` David Miller
2013-05-20 8:51 ` David Laight
2013-05-20 8:51 ` David Laight
2013-05-20 9:50 ` Daniel Borkmann
2013-05-20 13:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-05-20 13:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-05-20 14:19 ` Florian Westphal
2013-05-20 14:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-05-20 14:35 ` David Laight
2013-05-20 14:35 ` David Laight
2013-05-24 17:23 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
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=519FA1FC.8090102@iki.fi \
--to=jarkko.sakkinen@iki.fi \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.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.