* [PATCH 6.12.y 0/2] nft_byteorder: fix the uninitialised-stack read without removing multi-register support
@ 2026-11-09 12:22 Abdifatah Suruur
2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" Abdifatah Suruur
2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 2/2] netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span Abdifatah Suruur
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable; +Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin
Pablo pointed out that the full upstream removal (bb061d3) cannot be
applied to stable trees: nftables versions before 1.1.0 can generate
len != size byteorder expressions, and the removal rejects them, so
existing rulesets may fail to load. The removal is tagged
stable+noautosel for that reason.
This series restores the multi-register path in 6.12.y and fixes the
uninitialised-stack read with a targeted initialisation:
1/2 reverts the removal currently in 6.12.y.
2/2 zeroes the destination span marked initialised by the control
plane, but only when source and destination registers differ, so
in-place conversions (sreg == dreg) keep their value.
This does not reject any rule and keeps the old userspace-visible
behaviour. It removes the dependency on CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL_ZERO
zeroing the register file.
Compile-tested by reverting the removal and applying 2/2 to the
pre-removal tree; runtime testing on 6.12.y is welcome.
Abdifatah Suruur (2):
Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support"
netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span
Pablo, this is the stable-specific alternative we discussed. If a single
folded patch is preferred, I can resend it that way.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" 2026-11-09 12:22 [PATCH 6.12.y 0/2] nft_byteorder: fix the uninitialised-stack read without removing multi-register support Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:22 ` Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:25 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 2/2] netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span Abdifatah Suruur 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: stable; +Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin This reverts commit 3c5fb3a6c8118d15e60295e76fb5b879021eef43. The upstream change removes multi-register byteorder support and is tagged stable+noautosel because nftables versions before 1.1.0 can generate length/size combinations that the removal rejects. Backporting it to stable can make existing rulesets fail to load. Restore the multi-register path so stable keeps the old userspace-visible behaviour, and fix the uninitialised-stack read with a targeted initialisation in the next patch. Signed-off-by: Abdifatah Suruur <suruurism@gmail.com> --- diff --git a/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c b/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c index 391aade36ef3c..74548b4c114b9 100644 --- a/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c +++ b/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ struct nft_byteorder { u8 sreg; u8 dreg; enum nft_byteorder_ops op:8; + u8 len; u8 size; }; @@ -27,8 +28,13 @@ void nft_byteorder_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, const struct nft_pktinfo *pkt) { const struct nft_byteorder *priv = nft_expr_priv(expr); - const u32 *src = ®s->data[priv->sreg]; + u32 *src = ®s->data[priv->sreg]; u32 *dst = ®s->data[priv->dreg]; + u16 *s16, *d16; + unsigned int i; + + s16 = (void *)src; + d16 = (void *)dst; switch (priv->size) { case 8: { @@ -37,14 +43,18 @@ void nft_byteorder_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, switch (priv->op) { case NFT_BYTEORDER_NTOH: - src64 = nft_reg_load64(src); - - nft_reg_store64(dst64, be64_to_cpu((__force __be64)src64)); + for (i = 0; i < priv->len / 8; i++) { + src64 = nft_reg_load64(&src[i]); + nft_reg_store64(&dst64[i], + be64_to_cpu((__force __be64)src64)); + } break; case NFT_BYTEORDER_HTON: - src64 = (__force __u64)cpu_to_be64(nft_reg_load64(src)); - - nft_reg_store64(dst64, src64); + for (i = 0; i < priv->len / 8; i++) { + src64 = (__force __u64) + cpu_to_be64(nft_reg_load64(&src[i])); + nft_reg_store64(&dst64[i], src64); + } break; } break; @@ -52,20 +62,24 @@ void nft_byteorder_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, case 4: switch (priv->op) { case NFT_BYTEORDER_NTOH: - *dst = ntohl((__force __be32)*src); + for (i = 0; i < priv->len / 4; i++) + dst[i] = ntohl((__force __be32)src[i]); break; case NFT_BYTEORDER_HTON: - *dst = (__force __u32)htonl(*src); + for (i = 0; i < priv->len / 4; i++) + dst[i] = (__force __u32)htonl(src[i]); break; } break; case 2: switch (priv->op) { case NFT_BYTEORDER_NTOH: - nft_reg_store16(dst, ntohs(nft_reg_load_be16(src))); + for (i = 0; i < priv->len / 2; i++) + d16[i] = ntohs((__force __be16)s16[i]); break; case NFT_BYTEORDER_HTON: - nft_reg_store_be16(dst, htons(nft_reg_load16(src))); + for (i = 0; i < priv->len / 2; i++) + d16[i] = (__force __u16)htons(s16[i]); break; } break; @@ -123,22 +137,20 @@ static int nft_byteorder_init(const struct nft_ctx *ctx, if (err < 0) return err; - /* no longer support multi-reg conversions */ - if (len != size) - return -EOPNOTSUPP; + priv->len = len; err = nft_parse_register_load(ctx, tb[NFTA_BYTEORDER_SREG], &priv->sreg, - len); + priv->len); if (err < 0) return err; err = nft_parse_register_store(ctx, tb[NFTA_BYTEORDER_DREG], &priv->dreg, NULL, NFT_DATA_VALUE, - len); + priv->len); if (err < 0) return err; - if (nft_reg_overlap(priv->sreg, priv->dreg, len)) + if (nft_reg_overlap(priv->sreg, priv->dreg, priv->len)) return -EINVAL; return 0; @@ -155,10 +167,9 @@ static int nft_byteorder_dump(struct sk_buff *skb, goto nla_put_failure; if (nla_put_be32(skb, NFTA_BYTEORDER_OP, htonl(priv->op))) goto nla_put_failure; - if (nla_put_be32(skb, NFTA_BYTEORDER_SIZE, htonl(priv->size))) + if (nla_put_be32(skb, NFTA_BYTEORDER_LEN, htonl(priv->len))) goto nla_put_failure; - /* compatibility for old userspace which permitted size != len */ - if (nla_put_be32(skb, NFTA_BYTEORDER_LEN, htonl(priv->size))) + if (nla_put_be32(skb, NFTA_BYTEORDER_SIZE, htonl(priv->size))) goto nla_put_failure; return 0; -- 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" 2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:25 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2026-11-09 12:34 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2026-11-09 12:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Abdifatah Suruur; +Cc: stable, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin Hi, On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 03:22:54PM +0300, Abdifatah Suruur wrote: > This reverts commit 3c5fb3a6c8118d15e60295e76fb5b879021eef43. > > The upstream change removes multi-register byteorder support and is > tagged stable+noautosel because nftables versions before 1.1.0 can > generate length/size combinations that the removal rejects. Backporting > it to stable can make existing rulesets fail to load. Yes, so why are you posting this as is? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" 2026-11-09 12:25 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2026-11-09 12:34 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2026-11-09 12:48 ` Sasha Levin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2026-11-09 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Abdifatah Suruur; +Cc: stable, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 01:25:08PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 03:22:54PM +0300, Abdifatah Suruur wrote: > > This reverts commit 3c5fb3a6c8118d15e60295e76fb5b879021eef43. > > > > The upstream change removes multi-register byteorder support and is > > tagged stable+noautosel because nftables versions before 1.1.0 can > > generate length/size combinations that the removal rejects. Backporting > > it to stable can make existing rulesets fail to load. > > Yes, so why are you posting this as is? Apologies, I got this all wrong. I thought you wanted to pull in "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" but this already slipped through -stable? So your series look correct. Sorry for the fuzz. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" 2026-11-09 12:34 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2026-11-09 12:48 ` Sasha Levin 2026-11-09 13:18 ` Abdifatah Suruur 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Sasha Levin @ 2026-11-09 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pablo Neira Ayuso; +Cc: Abdifatah Suruur, stable, Florian Westphal, Greg KH On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 01:34:44PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 01:25:08PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 03:22:54PM +0300, Abdifatah Suruur wrote: >> > This reverts commit 3c5fb3a6c8118d15e60295e76fb5b879021eef43. >> > >> > The upstream change removes multi-register byteorder support and is >> > tagged stable+noautosel because nftables versions before 1.1.0 can >> > generate length/size combinations that the removal rejects. Backporting >> > it to stable can make existing rulesets fail to load. >> >> Yes, so why are you posting this as is? > >Apologies, I got this all wrong. > >I thought you wanted to pull in "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove > multi-register support" but this already slipped through -stable? We were asked[1] to backport it. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ataIP3xm8DDtO82v@strlen.de/ -- Thanks, Sasha ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" 2026-11-09 12:48 ` Sasha Levin @ 2026-11-09 13:18 ` Abdifatah Suruur 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: stable; +Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin Hi Pablo, Sasha, Thanks for the review and the correction. The series is unchanged: the revert restores multi-register support and 2/2 closes the uninitialised read with the in-place guard. Sasha, understood that the removal backport was requested; this series keeps the security fix while restoring the old userspace behaviour. Please queue the 6.12.y series when you get a chance. Thanks, Abdifatah ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 6.12.y 2/2] netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span 2026-11-09 12:22 [PATCH 6.12.y 0/2] nft_byteorder: fix the uninitialised-stack read without removing multi-register support Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:22 ` Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:27 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: stable; +Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin nft_byteorder_eval() writes only priv->len / priv->size whole elements, while nft_parse_register_store() marks DIV_ROUND_UP(priv->len, 4) full 32-bit words as initialised. For len/size combinations that do not fill the last marked word -- for example size 2 with len 1, which writes no element at all -- the control plane still accepts a later load of the whole word from another expression. That load reads stale bytes from the struct nft_regs stack slot in nft_do_chain(), which is not zero-initialised. Zero the span that the control plane marks as initialised before the conversion, but only when the source and destination registers differ. nft_reg_overlap() allows an in-place conversion (sreg == dreg), and the source is already initialised in that case; zeroing it would corrupt the value. This preserves multi-register support and does not reject any rule, so old nftables versions that generate len != size continue to load. It only removes the dependency on some other initialisation of the register file. Builds with CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL_ZERO mask the leak, but nft_byteorder must not rely on that. Fixes: 14fb07130c7d ("netfilter: nf_tables: allow loads only when register is initialized") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Abdifatah Suruur <suruurism@gmail.com> --- diff --git a/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c b/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c --- a/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c +++ b/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c @@ -33,6 +33,17 @@ void nft_byteorder_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, u16 *s16, *d16; unsigned int i; + /* + * nft_parse_register_store() marks DIV_ROUND_UP(priv->len, 4) + * words as initialised, but this function only writes whole + * len/size elements. Zero the marked span so that a later load + * cannot read uninitialised stack data. Do not touch it when + * source and destination are the same register: the source is + * already initialised and zeroing it would corrupt the value. + */ + if (priv->sreg != priv->dreg) + memset(dst, 0, DIV_ROUND_UP(priv->len, 4) * sizeof(u32)); + s16 = (void *)src; d16 = (void *)dst; -- 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.12.y 2/2] netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span 2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 2/2] netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span Abdifatah Suruur @ 2026-11-09 12:27 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2026-11-09 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Abdifatah Suruur; +Cc: stable, Florian Westphal, Greg KH, Sasha Levin On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 03:22:59PM +0300, Abdifatah Suruur wrote: > nft_byteorder_eval() writes only priv->len / priv->size whole elements, > while nft_parse_register_store() marks DIV_ROUND_UP(priv->len, 4) full > 32-bit words as initialised. For len/size combinations that do not fill > the last marked word -- for example size 2 with len 1, which writes no > element at all -- the control plane still accepts a later load of the > whole word from another expression. That load reads stale bytes from > the struct nft_regs stack slot in nft_do_chain(), which is not > zero-initialised. > > Zero the span that the control plane marks as initialised before the > conversion, but only when the source and destination registers differ. > nft_reg_overlap() allows an in-place conversion (sreg == dreg), and the > source is already initialised in that case; zeroing it would corrupt > the value. > > This preserves multi-register support and does not reject any rule, so > old nftables versions that generate len != size continue to load. It > only removes the dependency on some other initialisation of the > register file. Builds with CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL_ZERO mask the leak, > but nft_byteorder must not rely on that. > > Fixes: 14fb07130c7d ("netfilter: nf_tables: allow loads only when register is initialized") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Abdifatah Suruur <suruurism@gmail.com> > --- > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c b/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c > --- a/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/nft_byteorder.c > @@ -33,6 +33,17 @@ void nft_byteorder_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, > u16 *s16, *d16; > unsigned int i; > > + /* > + * nft_parse_register_store() marks DIV_ROUND_UP(priv->len, 4) > + * words as initialised, but this function only writes whole > + * len/size elements. Zero the marked span so that a later load > + * cannot read uninitialised stack data. Do not touch it when > + * source and destination are the same register: the source is > + * already initialised and zeroing it would corrupt the value. > + */ > + if (priv->sreg != priv->dreg) > + memset(dst, 0, DIV_ROUND_UP(priv->len, 4) * sizeof(u32)); Yes, this should be fine. > + > s16 = (void *)src; > d16 = (void *)dst; > > -- > 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-11-09 13:18 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-11-09 12:22 [PATCH 6.12.y 0/2] nft_byteorder: fix the uninitialised-stack read without removing multi-register support Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 1/2] Revert "netfilter: nft_byteorder: remove multi-register support" Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:25 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2026-11-09 12:34 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso 2026-11-09 12:48 ` Sasha Levin 2026-11-09 13:18 ` Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 2/2] netfilter: nft_byteorder: initialise the marked destination span Abdifatah Suruur 2026-11-09 12:27 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox