All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: Sanghyun Park <sanghyun.park.cnu@gmail.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@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>,
	Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>,
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
	Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3] bpf: Fix stack out-of-bounds write in cgroup link update
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 18:26:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b380f7e7-2e0e-4c8c-9a70-e6a577d268cf@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260821084726.3769957-2-sanghyun.park.cnu@gmail.com>

On 21/8/26 16:47, Sanghyun Park wrote:
> The cgroup link update path checks only the program type. Several cgroup
> hooks share a type while using different runtime contexts or verifier
> contracts. A UDP6 sock_addr program can therefore replace a UDP4 program
> and write beyond the four-byte ipc.addr context into adjacent fields of
> the stack-local struct ipcm_cookie. The same omission lets an LSM_MAC
> program replace an LSM_CGROUP program despite the incompatible return
> semantics.
> 
> Validate replacement programs against the link attach type. Use the
> existing per-type rules where applicable, and compare LSM
> expected_attach_type explicitly because both flavors share
> BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM. Preserve legacy non-enforcing CGROUP_SKB
> ingress/egress updates.
> 
> CGROUP_SKB programs do not require CAP_NET_ADMIN when loaded. That
> permission is checked when the program is attached. Once the link exists,
> updates are controlled through its FD, so BPF_LINK_UPDATE does not check
> CAP_NET_ADMIN again. Keep this behavior and only validate the attach type
> during link update.

Any issue of checking CAP_NET_ADMIN for BPF_LINK_UPDATE?

If no, checking CAP_NET_ADMIN for BPF_LINK_UPDATE looks okay.

> 
> Fixes: 0c991ebc8c69 ("bpf: Implement bpf_prog replacement for an active bpf_cgroup_link")
> Signed-off-by: Sanghyun Park <sanghyun.park.cnu@gmail.com>
> ---
> v3:
>   - Factor the CGROUP_SKB CAP_NET_ADMIN check into an attach-only helper.
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260818061021.2551771-2-sanghyun.park.cnu@gmail.com
>   - Extend validation from cgroup sock_addr programs to all cgroup program
>     types, including exact LSM attach flavors.
>   - Preserve legacy CGROUP_SKB ingress/egress replacement compatibility.
>   - Keep the CGROUP_SKB CAP_NET_ADMIN check on attach, not link update.
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260805052858.2390918-3-sanghyun.park.cnu@gmail.com
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 6874ba1424af05..dfea337ff25ea5 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -4483,12 +4483,6 @@ static int bpf_prog_attach_check_attach_type(const struct bpf_prog *prog,
>  	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_LOOKUP:
+	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM:

Add a 'case' here instead of checking it in link_update()?

And, a selftest is needed to verify the issue and the fix.

Thanks,
Leon

>  		return attach_type == prog->expected_attach_type ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> [...]

      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-21 10:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-21  8:47 [PATCH bpf-next v3] bpf: Fix stack out-of-bounds write in cgroup link update Sanghyun Park
2026-08-21  8:57 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21  9:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-21 10:26 ` Leon Hwang [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=b380f7e7-2e0e-4c8c-9a70-e6a577d268cf@linux.dev \
    --to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=pulehui@huawei.com \
    --cc=sanghyun.park.cnu@gmail.com \
    --cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
    --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.