Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tristan Madani <tristmd@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>,
	Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Tristan Madani <tristan@talencesecurity.com>
Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Reset register bounds before narrowing retval range in check_mem_access()
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 12:08:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260617120815.3910671-1-tristmd@gmail.com> (raw)

From: Tristan Madani <tristan@talencesecurity.com>

When the BPF verifier processes a context load of an LSM hook return
value, it calls __mark_reg_s32_range() to narrow the register to the
hook's valid range. However, __mark_reg_s32_range() intersects the new
range with the register's existing bounds using max_t()/min_t() rather
than replacing them.

If the destination register carries stale bounds from a prior instruction
(e.g. BPF_MOV64_IMM), the intersection can produce a range narrower than
reality. The verifier then believes it knows the register's exact value,
while at runtime the actual hook return value is loaded, creating a
verifier/runtime mismatch that can be used to bypass BPF memory safety
checks.

The else branch already calls mark_reg_unknown() to reset register state
before any narrowing. Apply the same reset in the is_retval path so
stale bounds are cleared before __mark_reg_s32_range() intersects.

Fixes: 5d99e198be27 ("bpf, lsm: Add check for BPF LSM return value")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Tristan Madani <tristan@talencesecurity.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 54c6953a8b84..7e30dddc7721 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7532,6 +7532,7 @@ static int check_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, u32 regn
 			 */
 			if (info.reg_type == SCALAR_VALUE) {
 				if (info.is_retval && get_func_retval_range(env->prog, &range)) {
+					mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, value_regno);
 					err = __mark_reg_s32_range(env, regs, value_regno,
 								   range.minval, range.maxval);
 					if (err)
-- 
2.47.3


             reply	other threads:[~2026-06-17 12:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-17 12:08 Tristan Madani [this message]
2026-06-19  9:49 ` [PATCH] bpf: Reset register bounds before narrowing retval range in check_mem_access() Jiri Olsa

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=20260617120815.3910671-1-tristmd@gmail.com \
    --to=tristmd@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tristan@talencesecurity.com \
    --cc=xukuohai@huawei.com \
    /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