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
next parent 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