From: Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>,
Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 7.1.y] bpf: Reject negative const offsets for buffer pointers
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 19:25:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260721022512.213519-1-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2026072002-stony-borax-fbef@gregkh>
The verifier rejects variable offsets for PTR_TO_TP_BUFFER and PTR_TO_BUF
accesses, but it currently accepts a constant negative offset produced by
pointer arithmetic.
Commit 022ac0750883 ("bpf: use reg->var_off instead of reg->off for
pointers") moved constant pointer offsets from reg->off to reg->var_off.
However, __check_buffer_access() continued to check only the instruction
offset. An access with reg->var_off equal to -8 and an instruction offset
of zero therefore passes verification.
For writable raw tracepoints, the access end is also calculated from the
unsigned reg->var_off.value. An eight-byte access starting at -8 wraps
the calculated end to zero, allowing the program to load and attach
without increasing max_tp_access.
After ensuring that reg->var_off is constant, calculate the effective
access start using signed arithmetic and reject it when it is negative.
Use the validated start to calculate the access end for both
PTR_TO_TP_BUFFER and PTR_TO_BUF.
Fixes: 022ac0750883 ("bpf: use reg->var_off instead of reg->off for pointers")
Signed-off-by: Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.2.0
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260714093846.18159-2-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit fd4cfa8c8f9a17cdec0539334d28754bc1d8a5d9)
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index ff9b1f68ceca..fe6ed3559b42 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -5558,14 +5558,11 @@ static int check_max_stack_depth(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
static int __check_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
const char *buf_info,
const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
- int regno, int off, int size)
+ int regno, int off, int size,
+ u32 *access_end)
{
- if (off < 0) {
- verbose(env,
- "R%d invalid %s buffer access: off=%d, size=%d\n",
- regno, buf_info, off, size);
- return -EACCES;
- }
+ s64 start;
+
if (!tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
char tn_buf[48];
@@ -5576,6 +5573,15 @@ static int __check_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return -EACCES;
}
+ start = (s64)reg->var_off.value + off;
+ if (start < 0) {
+ verbose(env,
+ "R%d invalid negative %s buffer offset: off=%d, var_off=%lld\n",
+ regno, buf_info, off, (s64)reg->var_off.value);
+ return -EACCES;
+ }
+
+ *access_end = start + size;
return 0;
}
@@ -5583,14 +5589,14 @@ static int check_tp_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
int regno, int off, int size)
{
+ u32 access_end;
int err;
- err = __check_buffer_access(env, "tracepoint", reg, regno, off, size);
+ err = __check_buffer_access(env, "tracepoint", reg, regno, off, size, &access_end);
if (err)
return err;
- env->prog->aux->max_tp_access = max(reg->var_off.value + off + size,
- env->prog->aux->max_tp_access);
+ env->prog->aux->max_tp_access = max(access_end, env->prog->aux->max_tp_access);
return 0;
}
@@ -5602,13 +5608,14 @@ static int check_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
u32 *max_access)
{
const char *buf_info = type_is_rdonly_mem(reg->type) ? "rdonly" : "rdwr";
+ u32 access_end;
int err;
- err = __check_buffer_access(env, buf_info, reg, regno, off, size);
+ err = __check_buffer_access(env, buf_info, reg, regno, off, size, &access_end);
if (err)
return err;
- *max_access = max(reg->var_off.value + off + size, *max_access);
+ *max_access = max(access_end, *max_access);
return 0;
}
--
2.43.0
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-21 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 15:16 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] bpf: Reject negative const offsets for buffer pointers" failed to apply to 7.1-stable tree gregkh
2026-07-21 2:25 ` Sun Jian [this message]
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=20260721022512.213519-1-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com \
--to=sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=shung-hsi.yu@suse.com \
--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