BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Network Development" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	netfilter-devel <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"Andrii Nakryiko" <andrii@kernel.org>,
	"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
	"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
	"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	"Maxim Mikityanskiy" <maximmi@nvidia.com>,
	"Pablo Neira Ayuso" <pablo@netfilter.org>,
	"Florian Westphal" <fw@strlen.de>,
	"Jesper Dangaard Brouer" <brouer@redhat.com>,
	"Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/10] bpf: Track provenance for pointers formed from referenced PTR_TO_BTF_ID
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 13:26:45 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211219212645.5pqswdfay75vyify@ast-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211219195603.pta666hynpz45xlf@apollo.legion>

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 01:26:03AM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> >
> > The goal is clear now, but look at it differently:
> > struct nf_conn *ct = bpf_xdp_ct_lookup(...);
> > if (ct) {
> >   struct nf_conn *master = ct->master;
> >   struct net *net = ct->ct_net.net;
> >
> >   bpf_ct_release(ct);
> >   master->status; // prevent this ?
> >   net->ifindex;   // but allow this ?
> 
> I think both will be prevented with the current logic, no?
> net will be ct + offset, so if mark_btf_ld_reg writes PTR_TO_BTF_ID to dst_reg
> for net, it will copy ct's reg's ref_obj_id to parent_ref_obj_id of dst_reg (net).
> Then on release of ct, net's reg gets killed too since reg[ct]->ref_obj_id
> matches its parent_ref_obj_id.

Excatly, but it should be allowed.
There is nothing wrong with 'net' access after ct_release.

> > }
> > The verifier cannot statically check this. That's why all such deref
> > are done via BPF_PROBE_MEM (which is the same as probe_read_kernel).
> > We must disallow use after free when it can cause a crash.
> > This case is not the one.
> 
> That is a valid point, this is certainly in 'nice to have/prevents obvious
> misuse' territory, but if this can be done without introducing too much
> complexity, I'd like us to do it.
> 
> A bit of a digression, but:
> I'm afraid this patch is going to be brought up again for a future effort
> related to XDP queueing that Toke is working on. We have a similar scenario
> there, when xdp_md (aliasing xdp_frame) is dequeued from the PIFO map, and
> PTR_TO_PACKET is obtained by reading xdp_md->data. The xdp_md is referenced, so
> we need to invalidate these pkt pointers as well, in addition to killing xdp_md
> copies. Also this parent_ref_obj_id state allows us to reject comparisons
> between pkt pointers pointing into different xdp_md's (when you dequeue more
> than one at once and form multiple pkt pointers pointing into different
> xdp_mds).

I cannot quite grasp the issue. Sounds orthogonal. The pkt pointers
are not ptr_to_btf_id like. There is no PROBE_MEM there.

> >   struct nf_conn *ct = bpf_xdp_ct_lookup(...);
> >   struct nf_conn *master = ct->master;
> >   bpf_ct_release(master);
> > definitely has to be prevented, since it will cause a crash.
> >
> > As a follow up to this set would be great to allow ptr_to_btf_id
> > pointers persist longer than program execution.
> > Users already asked to allow the following:
> >   map_value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(...);
> >   struct nf_conn *ct = bpf_xdp_ct_lookup(...);
> >   map_value->saved_ct = ct;
> > and some time later in a different or the same program:
> >   map_value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(...);
> >   bpf_ct_release(map_value->saved_ct);
> >
> > Currently folks work around this deficiency by storing some
> > sort of id and doing extra lookups while performance is suffering.
> > wdyt?
> 
> Very interesting idea! I'm guessing we'll need something akin to bpf_timer
> support, i.e. a dedicated type verified using BTF which can be embedded in
> map_value? I'll be happy to work on enabling this.

Thanks! Would be awesome.

> One thought though (just confirming):
> If user does map_value->saved_ct = ct, we have to ignore reference leak check
> for ct's ref_id, but if they rewrite saved_ct, we would also have to unignore
> it, correct?

We cannot just ignore it :)
I was thinking to borrow std::unique_ptr like semanitcs.

struct nf_conn *ct = bpf_xdp_ct_lookup(...); // here ref checking logic tracks it as normal
map_value->saved_ct = ct; // here it trasnfers the ref from Rx into map_value
ct->status; // cannot be access here.

It could look unnatural to typical C programmer, so we might need 
explicit std::move-like helper, so the assignment will be:
bpf_move_ptr(&map_value->saved_ct, &ct); // same as map_value->saved_ct = ct; ct = NULL;
...
bpf_move_ptr(&ct, &map_value->saved_ct); // would take the ownership back from the map
// and the ref checking logic tracks 'ct' again as normal

> I think we can make this tracking easier by limiting to one bpf_ptr_to_btf
> struct in map_value, then it can simply be part of ptr_to_map_value's reg_state.

Possible. Hopefully such limitiation will not be needed.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-19 21:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-17  1:50 [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/10] Introduce unstable CT lookup helpers Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 01/10] bpf: Refactor bpf_check_mod_kfunc_call Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/10] bpf: Remove DEFINE_KFUNC_BTF_ID_SET Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/10] bpf: Extend kfunc with PTR_TO_CTX, PTR_TO_MEM argument support Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  2:17   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  3:21     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/10] bpf: Introduce mem, size argument pair support for kfunc Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  2:19   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  2:53     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 05/10] bpf: Add reference tracking support to kfunc Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  2:22   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  3:01     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  3:54       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  4:38         ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  4:50           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/10] bpf: Track provenance for pointers formed from referenced PTR_TO_BTF_ID Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  2:28   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  3:18     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  4:00       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  4:33         ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19  5:05           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19  5:25             ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19 17:43               ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19 18:10                 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19 19:08                   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-12-19 19:56                     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-19 21:26                       ` Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2021-12-19 21:54                         ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/10] net/netfilter: Add unstable CT lookup helpers for XDP and TC-BPF Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  8:18   ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2021-12-17  8:40     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/10] selftests/bpf: Add test for unstable CT lookup API Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 09/10] selftests/bpf: Add test_verifier support to fixup kfunc call insns Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  1:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 10/10] selftests/bpf: Extend kfunc selftests Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17  9:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/10] Introduce unstable CT lookup helpers Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-17 16:40   ` Andrii Nakryiko

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=20211219212645.5pqswdfay75vyify@ast-mbp \
    --to=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=maximmi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=toke@redhat.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox