linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.18 05/27] bpf/verifier: reject BPF_ALU64|BPF

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20171019134844.874103468@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:49:11 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 3.18 05/27] bpf/verifier: reject BPF_ALU64|BPF_END

3.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>


[ Upstream commit e67b8a685c7c984e834e3181ef4619cd7025a136 ]

Neither ___bpf_prog_run nor the JITs accept it.
Also adds a new test case.

Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -932,7 +932,8 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct reg_state
 			}
 		} else {
 			if (insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_0 || insn->off != 0 ||
-			    (insn->imm != 16 && insn->imm != 32 && insn->imm != 64)) {
+			    (insn->imm != 16 && insn->imm != 32 && insn->imm != 64) ||
+			    BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64) {
 				verbose("BPF_END uses reserved fields\n");
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}