Linux io-uring development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Woraphat Khiaodaeng <worapat.kd2@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org, security@kernel.org,
	Woraphat Khiaodaeng <worapat.kd2@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH] io_uring/bpf-ops: reject re-registration of an already-bound ops
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 22:45:37 +0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717154537.129736-1-worapat.kd2@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PAVEL_MESSAGE_ID>

io_install_bpf() only rejects a second registration on the ctx side
(ctx->bpf_ops) and sets the per-map back-pointer ops->priv
unconditionally. The struct_ops link path never advances a map past
BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_READY, so the same io_uring_bpf_ops map can be
registered more than once, and bpf_io_reg() re-resolves the target ring
via fget(ops->ring_fd) on every call. A caller can therefore point the
same ring_fd at a different io_ring_ctx between two BPF_LINK_CREATE
calls.

The second registration passes the ctx->bpf_ops check (the new ctx has
none) and overwrites ops->priv, orphaning the first ctx. Teardown
(io_eject_bpf()/bpf_io_unreg()) only reaches a ctx through ops->priv, so
the orphaned ctx is never torn down: its ctx->loop_step keeps pointing
into the struct_ops trampoline, which is freed once the map is gone. A
later io_uring_enter() on the orphaned ring then calls the dangling
ctx->loop_step from io_run_loop() -- a use-after-free of freed
executable memory, reachable by a task with CAP_BPF + CAP_PERFMON.

Reject registration when ops->priv is already set, as hid_bpf_reg()
does for its struct_ops.

Fixes: 98f37634b12b ("io_uring/bpf-ops: implement bpf ops registration")
Signed-off-by: Woraphat Khiaodaeng <worapat.kd2@gmail.com>
---
 io_uring/bpf-ops.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/io_uring/bpf-ops.c b/io_uring/bpf-ops.c
index 5a50f0675..cf2bd068e 100644
--- a/io_uring/bpf-ops.c
+++ b/io_uring/bpf-ops.c
@@ -168,6 +168,8 @@ static int io_install_bpf(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, struct io_uring_bpf_ops *ops)
 
 	if (ctx->bpf_ops)
 		return -EBUSY;
+	if (ops->priv)
+		return -EBUSY;
 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!ops->loop_step))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-- 
2.43.0


       reply	other threads:[~2026-07-17 15:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <PAVEL_MESSAGE_ID>
2026-07-17 15:45 ` Woraphat Khiaodaeng [this message]
2026-07-17 16:05   ` [PATCH] io_uring/bpf-ops: reject re-registration of an already-bound ops Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2026-07-18  2:30     ` [PATCH] test: add io_uring bpf-ops double-registration regression test Woraphat Khiaodaeng
2026-07-17 17:05   ` [PATCH] io_uring/bpf-ops: reject re-registration of an already-bound ops Pavel Begunkov
2026-07-17 17:05   ` Jens Axboe

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=20260717154537.129736-1-worapat.kd2@gmail.com \
    --to=worapat.kd2@gmail.com \
    --cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=security@kernel.org \
    /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