From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/6] bpf: Harden register offset checks for release kfunc
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 12:27:43 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220301065745.1634848-5-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220301065745.1634848-1-memxor@gmail.com>
Let's ensure that the PTR_TO_BTF_ID reg being passed in to release kfunc
always has its offset set to 0. While not a real problem now, there's a
very real possibility this will become a problem when more and more
kfuncs are exposed.
Previous commits already protected against non-zero var_off. The case we
are concerned about now is when we have a type that can be returned by
acquire kfunc:
struct foo {
int a;
int b;
struct bar b;
};
... and struct bar is also a type that can be returned by another
acquire kfunc.
Then, doing the following sequence:
struct foo *f = bpf_get_foo(); // acquire kfunc
if (!f)
return 0;
bpf_put_bar(&f->b); // release kfunc
... would work with the current code, since the btf_struct_ids_match
takes reg->off into account for matching pointer type with release kfunc
argument type, but would obviously be incorrect, and most likely lead to
a kernel crash. A test has been included later to prevent regressions in
this area.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
kernel/bpf/btf.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/btf.c b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
index 7f6a0ae5028b..ba6845225b65 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
@@ -5753,6 +5753,9 @@ static int btf_check_func_arg_match(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (is_kfunc)
+ rel = btf_kfunc_id_set_contains(btf, resolve_prog_type(env->prog),
+ BTF_KFUNC_TYPE_RELEASE, func_id);
/* check that BTF function arguments match actual types that the
* verifier sees.
*/
@@ -5816,6 +5819,16 @@ static int btf_check_func_arg_match(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
regno, reg->ref_obj_id, ref_obj_id);
return -EFAULT;
}
+ /* Ensure that offset of referenced PTR_TO_BTF_ID is
+ * always zero, when passed to release function.
+ * var_off has already been checked to be 0 by
+ * check_func_arg_reg_off.
+ */
+ if (rel && reg->off) {
+ bpf_log(log, "R%d with ref_obj_id=%d must have zero offset when passed to release kfunc\n",
+ regno, reg->ref_obj_id);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
ref_regno = regno;
ref_obj_id = reg->ref_obj_id;
}
@@ -5892,8 +5905,6 @@ static int btf_check_func_arg_match(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
/* Either both are set, or neither */
WARN_ON_ONCE((ref_obj_id && !ref_regno) || (!ref_obj_id && ref_regno));
if (is_kfunc) {
- rel = btf_kfunc_id_set_contains(btf, resolve_prog_type(env->prog),
- BTF_KFUNC_TYPE_RELEASE, func_id);
/* We already made sure ref_obj_id is set only for one argument */
if (rel && !ref_obj_id) {
bpf_log(log, "release kernel function %s expects refcounted PTR_TO_BTF_ID\n",
--
2.35.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-01 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-01 6:57 [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/6] Fixes for bad PTR_TO_BTF_ID offset Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-01 6:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/6] bpf: Add check_func_arg_reg_off function Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-01 6:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/6] bpf: Fix PTR_TO_BTF_ID var_off check Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-01 6:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/6] bpf: Disallow negative offset in check_ptr_off_reg Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-01 6:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2022-03-02 3:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/6] bpf: Harden register offset checks for release kfunc Martin KaFai Lau
2022-03-02 9:42 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 21:56 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-03-02 22:30 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 22:44 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:00 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 23:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:29 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 23:39 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:31 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-03-01 6:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 5/6] selftests/bpf: Update tests for new errstr Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 22:45 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:02 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-01 6:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kfunc register offset checks Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-01 11:40 ` kernel test robot
2022-03-01 11:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-02 23:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 23:26 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-03-02 23:37 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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=20220301065745.1634848-5-memxor@gmail.com \
--to=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
/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