All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Nuoqi Gui <gnq25@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf, verifier: fold reg->var_off into PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS bounds check
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2026 13:33:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <562b1652176c8f40dd24027d0e0d44ddae800353.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260606-c3-01-v3-v3-1-97c51f592f15@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>

On Sat, 2026-06-06 at 18:50 +0800, Nuoqi Gui wrote:
> Constant pointer arithmetic on a PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS register lands the
> constant in reg->var_off (e.g. flow_keys(imm=4096)), but the
> PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS path in check_mem_access() passes only insn->off to
> check_flow_keys_access() and never folds reg->var_off.value.  The
> verifier therefore accepts an access that, at runtime, dereferences past
> struct bpf_flow_keys -- a verifier/runtime divergence that yields an
> out-of-bounds read and write of kernel stack memory.
> 
> Commit 022ac0750883 ("bpf: use reg->var_off instead of reg->off for
> pointers") removed the generic "off += reg->off" that check_mem_access()
> applied before the per-type dispatch and replaced it with per-path
> folding of reg->var_off.value (for example the ctx path now folds the
> register offset via check_ctx_access()).  The PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS path was
> not given the equivalent fold, so a constant offset that used to be
> folded and rejected is now silently accepted:
> 
>   before 022ac0750883: the offset stays in reg->off and is folded
>     generically, so the access is checked with off=4096 and rejected.
>   after  022ac0750883: the offset lands in reg->var_off, the flow_keys
>     path checks off=0 and accepts; at runtime the access dereferences
>     base + 0x1000.
> 
> For a BPF_PROG_TYPE_FLOW_DISSECTOR program the following is accepted:
> 
>   r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 144)   ; R2=flow_keys (PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS)
>   r2 += 0x1000              ; R2=flow_keys(imm=4096), accepted
>   r0 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)     ; accepted, var_off.value=0x1000 ignored
> 
> while the equivalent insn->off form
> 
>   r0 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0x1000)
> 
> has the same effective offset but is correctly rejected with
> "invalid access to flow keys off=4096 size=8", which isolates the defect
> to the missing var_off fold.  Once attached as a flow dissector, the
> accepted program reads kernel stack past struct bpf_flow_keys (a
> kernel-stack / KASLR information leak) and can likewise write past it,
> corrupting kernel memory.
> 
> Fix it by folding reg->var_off.value into the offset before the bounds
> check and rejecting non-constant offsets, mirroring the other pointer
> types (e.g. check_ctx_access()).
> 
> No released kernel is affected; the regression is confined to the 7.1
> development cycle (reproduced on v7.1-rc1..rc5), and v7.0.x rejects the
> program above.
> 
> Fixes: 022ac0750883 ("bpf: use reg->var_off instead of reg->off for pointers")
> Signed-off-by: Nuoqi Gui <gnq25@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>
> ---

Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>

[...]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-06 20:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-06 10:50 [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/2] bpf, verifier: fix PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS constant-offset OOB Nuoqi Gui
2026-06-06 10:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf, verifier: fold reg->var_off into PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS bounds check Nuoqi Gui
2026-06-06 11:05   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-06 20:33   ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2026-06-06 10:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/2] selftests/bpf: add tests for PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS offset bounds Nuoqi Gui
2026-06-06 10:57   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-06 11:32   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-06 20:34   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-06-07  0:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/2] bpf, verifier: fix PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS constant-offset OOB patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=562b1652176c8f40dd24027d0e0d44ddae800353.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=gnq25@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /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.