From: "Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" <memxor@gmail.com>
To: "Ning Ding" <dingning04@gmail.com>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <andrii@kernel.org>,
<eddyz87@gmail.com>, <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
<davem@davemloft.net>, <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Reject untrusted pointers in refcount_acquire
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 01:29:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DKEUKIOKSY28.2XVQVGCKLI40C@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260726235030.1152542-3-dingning04@gmail.com>
On Mon Jul 27, 2026 at 1:50 AM CEST, Ning Ding wrote:
> After bpf_rcu_read_unlock(), a refcounted map kptr is marked
> PTR_UNTRUSTED because it is no longer protected by RCU. The
> refcounted-kptr argument check ignores PTR_UNTRUSTED and still allows
> bpf_refcount_acquire() on that pointer.
>
> However, if another thread removes the object and drops its last reference, the
> stale address can later be reused for another refcounted object. A
> CAP_BPF-only reproducer observed bpf_refcount_acquire() returning
> non-NULL through such a stale pointer.
>
> Reject PTR_UNTRUSTED refcounted-kptr arguments and add a regression
> test.
>
> Fixes: 7c50b1cb76ac ("bpf: Add bpf_refcount_acquire kfunc")
> Reported-by: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260726021304.97ED91F000E9@smtp.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5
> Signed-off-by: Ning Ding <dingning04@gmail.com>
> ---
Same comment as the new set; split kernel commits and selftest commits into
separate ones. As for the fix, I think it would make more sense if
type_is_ptr_alloc_obj() was fixed to PTR_UNTRUSTED by definition, instead of
having to add extra checks on top.
pw-bot: cr
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 5 ++++
> .../bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 1e7343b625de..63b1d997fe80 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -12414,6 +12414,11 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
> meta->subprogno = reg->subprogno;
> break;
> case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_REFCOUNTED_KPTR:
> + if (reg->type & PTR_UNTRUSTED) {
> + verbose(env, "%s is an untrusted refcounted kptr\n",
> + reg_arg_name(env, argno));
> + return -EACCES;
> + }
> if (!type_is_ptr_alloc_obj(reg->type)) {
> verbose(env, "%s is neither owning or non-owning ref\n",
> reg_arg_name(env, argno));
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c
> index acd3e81a3916..80b92d7ec9ca 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c
> @@ -127,6 +127,33 @@ long refcount_acquire_rcu_map_kptr_unchecked_drop(void *ctx)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +SEC("?tc")
> +__failure __msg("is an untrusted refcounted kptr")
> +long refcount_acquire_after_rcu_unlock(void *ctx)
> +{
> + struct map_value_refcount_only *mapval;
> + struct node_refcount_only *n, *m;
> + int idx = 0;
> +
> + mapval = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&stashed_refcount_only, &idx);
> + if (!mapval)
> + return 1;
> +
> + bpf_rcu_read_lock();
> + n = mapval->node;
> + if (!n) {
> + bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
> + return 2;
> + }
> + bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> + m = bpf_refcount_acquire(n);
> + if (m)
> + bpf_obj_drop(m);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> SEC("?tc")
> __failure __msg("Unreleased reference id=3 alloc_insn={{[0-9]+}}")
> long rbtree_refcounted_node_ref_escapes_owning_input(void *ctx)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-02 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-26 23:50 [PATCH bpf v2 0/2] bpf: Fix refcount_acquire handling for borrowed kptrs Ning Ding
2026-07-26 23:50 ` [PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: Keep refcount_acquire nullable for borrowed RCU kptrs Ning Ding
2026-07-27 4:50 ` Greg KH
2026-07-26 23:50 ` [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Reject untrusted pointers in refcount_acquire Ning Ding
2026-07-27 0:13 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-27 0:40 ` Ning Ding
2026-07-27 4:50 ` Greg KH
2026-08-02 23:29 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2026-08-03 5:57 ` Ning Ding
2026-08-03 6:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-03 6:48 ` Ning Ding
2026-08-03 6:50 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-03 7:10 ` Ning Ding
2026-08-03 7:21 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-03 7:44 ` Ning Ding
2026-08-03 7:48 ` 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=DKEUKIOKSY28.2XVQVGCKLI40C@gmail.com \
--to=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dingning04@gmail.com \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=martin.lau@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox