stable.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org, ecree@solarflare.com,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jannh@google.com
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 06/14] bpf/verifier: fix bounds calculation on BPF_RSH" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:47:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <151395767035146@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171222152312.2945-7-daniel@iogearbox.net>


This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    [PATCH stable/4.14 06/14] bpf/verifier: fix bounds calculation on BPF_RSH

to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     bpf-verifier-fix-bounds-calculation-on-bpf_rsh.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From foo@baz Fri Dec 22 16:47:02 CET 2017
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:23:04 +0100
Subject: [PATCH stable/4.14 06/14] bpf/verifier: fix bounds calculation on BPF_RSH
To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, jannh@google.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Message-ID: <20171222152312.2945-7-daniel@iogearbox.net>

From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>


From: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>

[ Upstream commit 4374f256ce8182019353c0c639bb8d0695b4c941 ]

Incorrect signed bounds were being computed.
If the old upper signed bound was positive and the old lower signed bound was
negative, this could cause the new upper signed bound to be too low,
leading to security issues.

Fixes: b03c9f9fdc37 ("bpf/verifier: track signed and unsigned min/max values")
Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
[jannh@google.com: changed description to reflect bug impact]
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c |   30 ++++++++++++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -2157,20 +2157,22 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(st
 			mark_reg_unknown(regs, insn->dst_reg);
 			break;
 		}
-		/* BPF_RSH is an unsigned shift, so make the appropriate casts */
-		if (dst_reg->smin_value < 0) {
-			if (umin_val) {
-				/* Sign bit will be cleared */
-				dst_reg->smin_value = 0;
-			} else {
-				/* Lost sign bit information */
-				dst_reg->smin_value = S64_MIN;
-				dst_reg->smax_value = S64_MAX;
-			}
-		} else {
-			dst_reg->smin_value =
-				(u64)(dst_reg->smin_value) >> umax_val;
-		}
+		/* BPF_RSH is an unsigned shift.  If the value in dst_reg might
+		 * be negative, then either:
+		 * 1) src_reg might be zero, so the sign bit of the result is
+		 *    unknown, so we lose our signed bounds
+		 * 2) it's known negative, thus the unsigned bounds capture the
+		 *    signed bounds
+		 * 3) the signed bounds cross zero, so they tell us nothing
+		 *    about the result
+		 * If the value in dst_reg is known nonnegative, then again the
+		 * unsigned bounts capture the signed bounds.
+		 * Thus, in all cases it suffices to blow away our signed bounds
+		 * and rely on inferring new ones from the unsigned bounds and
+		 * var_off of the result.
+		 */
+		dst_reg->smin_value = S64_MIN;
+		dst_reg->smax_value = S64_MAX;
 		if (src_known)
 			dst_reg->var_off = tnum_rshift(dst_reg->var_off,
 						       umin_val);


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from daniel@iogearbox.net are

queue-4.14/bpf-fix-integer-overflows.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-branch-pruning-logic.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-s390x-do-not-reload-skb-pointers-in-non-skb-context.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-sparc-fix-usage-of-wrong-reg-for-load_skb_regs-after-call.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-incorrect-tracking-of-register-size-truncation.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-don-t-prune-branches-when-a-scalar-is-replaced-with-a-pointer.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-verifier-fix-bounds-calculation-on-bpf_rsh.patch
queue-4.14/selftests-bpf-add-tests-for-recent-bugfixes.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-corruption-on-concurrent-perf_event_output-calls.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-incorrect-sign-extension-in-check_alu_op.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-ppc64-do-not-reload-skb-pointers-in-non-skb-context.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-missing-error-return-in-check_stack_boundary.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-force-strict-alignment-checks-for-stack-pointers.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-32-bit-alu-op-verification.patch
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-build-issues-on-um-due-to-mising-bpf_perf_event.h.patch

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-22 15:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-22 15:22 [PATCH stable/4.14 00/14] BPF stable patches for 4.14 Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:22 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 01/14] bpf: fix branch pruning logic Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 01/14] bpf: fix branch pruning logic" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 02/14] bpf: fix corruption on concurrent perf_event_output calls Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 02/14] bpf: fix corruption on concurrent perf_event_output calls" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 03/14] bpf, s390x: do not reload skb pointers in non-skb context Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 03/14] bpf, s390x: do not reload skb pointers in non-skb context" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 04/14] bpf, ppc64: do not reload skb pointers in non-skb context Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 04/14] bpf, ppc64: do not reload skb pointers in non-skb context" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 05/14] bpf, sparc: fix usage of wrong reg for load_skb_regs after call Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 05/14] bpf, sparc: fix usage of wrong reg for load_skb_regs after call" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 06/14] bpf/verifier: fix bounds calculation on BPF_RSH Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` gregkh [this message]
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 07/14] bpf: fix incorrect sign extension in check_alu_op() Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 07/14] bpf: fix incorrect sign extension in check_alu_op()" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 08/14] bpf: fix incorrect tracking of register size truncation Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 08/14] bpf: fix incorrect tracking of register size truncation" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 09/14] bpf: fix 32-bit ALU op verification Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 09/14] bpf: fix 32-bit ALU op verification" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 10/14] bpf: fix missing error return in check_stack_boundary() Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 10/14] bpf: fix missing error return in check_stack_boundary()" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 11/14] bpf: force strict alignment checks for stack pointers Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 11/14] bpf: force strict alignment checks for stack pointers" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 12/14] bpf: don't prune branches when a scalar is replaced with a pointer Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 12/14] bpf: don't prune branches when a scalar is replaced with a pointer" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 13/14] bpf: fix integer overflows Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 13/14] bpf: fix integer overflows" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:23 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 14/14] selftests/bpf: add tests for recent bugfixes Daniel Borkmann
2017-12-22 15:47   ` Patch "[PATCH stable/4.14 14/14] selftests/bpf: add tests for recent bugfixes" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2017-12-22 15:45 ` [PATCH stable/4.14 00/14] BPF stable patches for 4.14 Greg KH
2017-12-22 15:48   ` Greg KH
2017-12-22 15:51 ` Greg KH

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=151395767035146@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=ecree@solarflare.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).