user/sven/linux.git/kernel/bpf, branch v5.10.94

bpf: Don't promote bogus looking registers after null check.

2022-01-27T09:54:00Z

[ Upstream commit e60b0d12a95dcf16a63225cead4541567f5cb517 ] If we ever get to a point again where we convert a bogus looking _or_null typed register containing a non-zero fixed or variable offset, then lets not reset these bounds to zero since they are not and also don't promote the register to a type, but instead leave it as _or_null. Converting to a unknown register could be an avenue as well, but then if we run into this case it would allow to leak a kernel pointer this way. Fixes: f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Disallow BPF_LOG_KERNEL log level for bpf(BPF_BTF_LOAD)

2022-01-27T09:53:54Z

[ Upstream commit 866de407444398bc8140ea70de1dba5f91cc34ac ] BPF_LOG_KERNEL is only used internally, so disallow bpf_btf_load() to set log level as BPF_LOG_KERNEL. The same checking has already been done in bpf_check(), so factor out a helper to check the validity of log attributes and use it in both places. Fixes: 8580ac9404f6 ("bpf: Process in-kernel BTF") Signed-off-by: Hou Tao Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Acked-by: Yonghong Song Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211203053001.740945-1-houtao1@huawei.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Adjust BTF log size limit.

2022-01-27T09:53:54Z

[ Upstream commit c5a2d43e998a821701029f23e25b62f9188e93ff ] Make BTF log size limit to be the same as the verifier log size limit. Otherwise tools that progressively increase log size and use the same log for BTF loading and program loading will be hitting hard to debug EINVAL. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211201181040.23337-7-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Fix out of bounds access from invalid *_or_null type verification

2022-01-16T08:14:22Z

[ no upstream commit given implicitly fixed through the larger refactoring in c25b2ae136039ffa820c26138ed4a5e5f3ab3841 ] While auditing some other code, I noticed missing checks inside the pointer arithmetic simulation, more specifically, adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(). Several *_OR_NULL types are not rejected whereas they are _required_ to be rejected given the expectation is that they get promoted into a 'real' pointer type for the success case, that is, after an explicit != NULL check. One case which stands out and is accessible from unprivileged (iff enabled given disabled by default) is BPF ring buffer. From crafting a PoC, the NULL check can be bypassed through an offset, and its id marking will then lead to promotion of mem_or_null to a mem type. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() helper can trigger this case through passing of reserved flags, for example. func#0 @0 0: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0 1: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 1: (18) r1 = 0x0 3: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 3: (b7) r2 = 8 4: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP8 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 4: (b7) r3 = 0 5: R1_w=map_ptr(id=0,off=0,ks=0,vs=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP8 R3_w=invP0 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 5: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_reserve#131 6: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 6: (bf) r6 = r0 7: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 7: (07) r0 += 1 8: R0_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=1,imm=0) R6_w=mem_or_null(id=2,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 8: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+4 R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 9: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 9: (62) *(u32 *)(r6 +0) = 0 R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 10: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 10: (bf) r1 = r6 11: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R1_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 11: (b7) r2 = 0 12: R0_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R1_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=invP0 R6_w=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=2,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm refs=2 12: (85) call bpf_ringbuf_submit#132 13: R6=invP(id=0) R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm 13: (b7) r0 = 0 14: R0_w=invP0 R6=invP(id=0) R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm 14: (95) exit from 8 to 13: safe processed 15 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 1 peak_states 1 mark_read 0 OK All three commits, that is b121b341e598 ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support"), 457f44363a88 ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it"), and the afbf21dce668 ("bpf: Support readonly/readwrite buffers in verifier") suffer the same cause and their *_OR_NULL type pendants must be rejected in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(). Make the test more robust by reusing reg_type_may_be_null() helper such that we catch all *_OR_NULL types we have today and in future. Note that pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_BTF_ID, PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF, and PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF is generally allowed. Fixes: b121b341e598 ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support") Fixes: 457f44363a88 ("bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it") Fixes: afbf21dce668 ("bpf: Support readonly/readwrite buffers in verifier") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Add kconfig knob for disabling unpriv bpf by default

2022-01-05T11:40:34Z

commit 08389d888287c3823f80b0216766b71e17f0aba5 upstream. Add a kconfig knob which allows for unprivileged bpf to be disabled by default. If set, the knob sets /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled to value of 2. This still allows a transition of 2 -> {0,1} through an admin. Similarly, this also still keeps 1 -> {1} behavior intact, so that once set to permanently disabled, it cannot be undone aside from a reboot. We've also added extra2 with max of 2 for the procfs handler, so that an admin still has a chance to toggle between 0 <-> 2. Either way, as an additional alternative, applications can make use of CAP_BPF that we added a while ago. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/74ec548079189e4e4dffaeb42b8987bb3c852eee.1620765074.git.daniel@iogearbox.net Cc: Salvatore Bonaccorso Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Make 32->64 bounds propagation slightly more robust

2021-12-22T08:30:50Z

commit e572ff80f05c33cd0cb4860f864f5c9c044280b6 upstream. Make the bounds propagation in __reg_assign_32_into_64() slightly more robust and readable by aligning it similarly as we did back in the __reg_combine_64_into_32() counterpart. Meaning, only propagate or pessimize them as a smin/smax pair. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: John Fastabend Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix signed bounds propagation after mov32

2021-12-22T08:30:50Z

commit 3cf2b61eb06765e27fec6799292d9fb46d0b7e60 upstream. For the case where both s32_{min,max}_value bounds are positive, the __reg_assign_32_into_64() directly propagates them to their 64 bit counterparts, otherwise it pessimises them into [0,u32_max] universe and tries to refine them later on by learning through the tnum as per comment in mentioned function. However, that does not always happen, for example, in mov32 operation we call zext_32_to_64(dst_reg) which invokes the __reg_assign_32_into_64() as is without subsequent bounds update as elsewhere thus no refinement based on tnum takes place. Thus, not calling into the __update_reg_bounds() / __reg_deduce_bounds() / __reg_bound_offset() triplet as we do, for example, in case of ALU ops via adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(), will lead to more pessimistic bounds when dumping the full register state: Before fix: 0: (b4) w0 = -1 1: R0_w=invP4294967295 (id=0,imm=ffffffff, smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295, umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295, var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0), s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1, u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1) 1: (bc) w0 = w0 2: R0_w=invP4294967295 (id=0,imm=ffffffff, smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967295, umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295, var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0), s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1, u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1) Technically, the smin_value=0 and smax_value=4294967295 bounds are not incorrect, but given the register is still a constant, they break assumptions about const scalars that smin_value == smax_value and umin_value == umax_value. After fix: 0: (b4) w0 = -1 1: R0_w=invP4294967295 (id=0,imm=ffffffff, smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295, umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295, var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0), s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1, u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1) 1: (bc) w0 = w0 2: R0_w=invP4294967295 (id=0,imm=ffffffff, smin_value=4294967295,smax_value=4294967295, umin_value=4294967295,umax_value=4294967295, var_off=(0xffffffff; 0x0), s32_min_value=-1,s32_max_value=-1, u32_min_value=-1,u32_max_value=-1) Without the smin_value == smax_value and umin_value == umax_value invariant being intact for const scalars, it is possible to leak out kernel pointers from unprivileged user space if the latter is enabled. For example, when such registers are involved in pointer arithmtics, then adjust_ptr_min_max_vals() will taint the destination register into an unknown scalar, and the latter can be exported and stored e.g. into a BPF map value. Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking") Reported-by: Kuee K1r0a Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: John Fastabend Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix integer overflow in argument calculation for bpf_map_area_alloc

2021-12-17T09:14:41Z

commit 7dd5d437c258bbf4cc15b35229e5208b87b8b4e0 upstream. In 32-bit architecture, the result of sizeof() is a 32-bit integer so the expression becomes the multiplication between 2 32-bit integer which can potentially leads to integer overflow. As a result, bpf_map_area_alloc() allocates less memory than needed. Fix this by casting 1 operand to u64. Fixes: 0d2c4f964050 ("bpf: Eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash maps") Fixes: 99c51064fb06 ("devmap: Use bpf_map_area_alloc() for allocating hash buckets") Fixes: 546ac1ffb70d ("bpf: add devmap, a map for storing net device references") Signed-off-by: Bui Quang Minh Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210613143440.71975-1-minhquangbui99@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Connor O'Brien Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix the off-by-two error in range markings

2021-12-14T10:32:36Z

commit 2fa7d94afc1afbb4d702760c058dc2d7ed30f226 upstream. The first commit cited below attempts to fix the off-by-one error that appeared in some comparisons with an open range. Due to this error, arithmetically equivalent pieces of code could get different verdicts from the verifier, for example (pseudocode): // 1. Passes the verifier: if (data + 8 > data_end) return early read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7] // 2. Rejected by the verifier (should still pass): if (data + 7 >= data_end) return early read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7] The attempted fix, however, shifts the range by one in a wrong direction, so the bug not only remains, but also such piece of code starts failing in the verifier: // 3. Rejected by the verifier, but the check is stricter than in #1. if (data + 8 >= data_end) return early read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7] The change performed by that fix converted an off-by-one bug into off-by-two. The second commit cited below added the BPF selftests written to ensure than code chunks like #3 are rejected, however, they should be accepted. This commit fixes the off-by-two error by adjusting new_range in the right direction and fixes the tests by changing the range into the one that should actually fail. Fixes: fb2a311a31d3 ("bpf: fix off by one for range markings with L{T, E} patterns") Fixes: b37242c773b2 ("bpf: add test cases to bpf selftests to cover all access tests") Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211130181607.593149-1-maximmi@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix toctou on read-only map's constant scalar tracking

2021-12-01T08:18:58Z

commit 353050be4c19e102178ccc05988101887c25ae53 upstream. Commit a23740ec43ba ("bpf: Track contents of read-only maps as scalars") is checking whether maps are read-only both from BPF program side and user space side, and then, given their content is constant, reading out their data via map->ops->map_direct_value_addr() which is then subsequently used as known scalar value for the register, that is, it is marked as __mark_reg_known() with the read value at verification time. Before a23740ec43ba, the register content was marked as an unknown scalar so the verifier could not make any assumptions about the map content. The current implementation however is prone to a TOCTOU race, meaning, the value read as known scalar for the register is not guaranteed to be exactly the same at a later point when the program is executed, and as such, the prior made assumptions of the verifier with regards to the program will be invalid which can cause issues such as OOB access, etc. While the BPF_F_RDONLY_PROG map flag is always fixed and required to be specified at map creation time, the map->frozen property is initially set to false for the map given the map value needs to be populated, e.g. for global data sections. Once complete, the loader "freezes" the map from user space such that no subsequent updates/deletes are possible anymore. For the rest of the lifetime of the map, this freeze one-time trigger cannot be undone anymore after a successful BPF_MAP_FREEZE cmd return. Meaning, any new BPF_* cmd calls which would update/delete map entries will be rejected with -EPERM since map_get_sys_perms() removes the FMODE_CAN_WRITE permission. This also means that pending update/delete map entries must still complete before this guarantee is given. This corner case is not an issue for loaders since they create and prepare such program private map in successive steps. However, a malicious user is able to trigger this TOCTOU race in two different ways: i) via userfaultfd, and ii) via batched updates. For i) userfaultfd is used to expand the competition interval, so that map_update_elem() can modify the contents of the map after map_freeze() and bpf_prog_load() were executed. This works, because userfaultfd halts the parallel thread which triggered a map_update_elem() at the time where we copy key/value from the user buffer and this already passed the FMODE_CAN_WRITE capability test given at that time the map was not "frozen". Then, the main thread performs the map_freeze() and bpf_prog_load(), and once that had completed successfully, the other thread is woken up to complete the pending map_update_elem() which then changes the map content. For ii) the idea of the batched update is similar, meaning, when there are a large number of updates to be processed, it can increase the competition interval between the two. It is therefore possible in practice to modify the contents of the map after executing map_freeze() and bpf_prog_load(). One way to fix both i) and ii) at the same time is to expand the use of the map's map->writecnt. The latter was introduced in fc9702273e2e ("bpf: Add mmap() support for BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY") and further refined in 1f6cb19be2e2 ("bpf: Prevent re-mmap()'ing BPF map as writable for initially r/o mapping") with the rationale to make a writable mmap()'ing of a map mutually exclusive with read-only freezing. The counter indicates writable mmap() mappings and then prevents/fails the freeze operation. Its semantics can be expanded beyond just mmap() by generally indicating ongoing write phases. This would essentially span any parallel regular and batched flavor of update/delete operation and then also have map_freeze() fail with -EBUSY. For the check_mem_access() in the verifier we expand upon the bpf_map_is_rdonly() check ensuring that all last pending writes have completed via bpf_map_write_active() test. Once the map->frozen is set and bpf_map_write_active() indicates a map->writecnt of 0 only then we are really guaranteed to use the map's data as known constants. For map->frozen being set and pending writes in process of still being completed we fall back to marking that register as unknown scalar so we don't end up making assumptions about it. With this, both TOCTOU reproducers from i) and ii) are fixed. Note that the map->writecnt has been converted into a atomic64 in the fix in order to avoid a double freeze_mutex mutex_{un,}lock() pair when updating map->writecnt in the various map update/delete BPF_* cmd flavors. Spanning the freeze_mutex over entire map update/delete operations in syscall side would not be possible due to then causing everything to be serialized. Similarly, something like synchronize_rcu() after setting map->frozen to wait for update/deletes to complete is not possible either since it would also have to span the user copy which can sleep. On the libbpf side, this won't break d66562fba1ce ("libbpf: Add BPF object skeleton support") as the anonymous mmap()-ed "map initialization image" is remapped as a BPF map-backed mmap()-ed memory where for .rodata it's non-writable. Fixes: a23740ec43ba ("bpf: Track contents of read-only maps as scalars") Reported-by: w1tcher.bupt@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov [fix conflict to call bpf_map_write_active_dec() in err_put block. fix conflict to insert new functions after find_and_alloc_map().] Reference: CVE-2021-4001 Signed-off-by: Masami Ichikawa(CIP) Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman