linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.17 081/101] bpf: dont leave partial mangled prog in jit

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: <20180720121426.701350320@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:14:27 +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,
        syzbot+7d427828b2ea6e592804@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.17 081/101] bpf: dont leave partial mangled prog in jit_subprogs error path

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

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

From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>

commit c7a897843224a92209f306c984975b704969b89d upstream.

syzkaller managed to trigger the following bug through fault injection:

  [...]
  [  141.043668] verifier bug. No program starts at insn 3
  [  141.044648] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 4072 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1613
                 get_callee_stack_depth kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1612 [inline]
  [  141.044648] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 4072 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1613
                 fixup_call_args kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5587 [inline]
  [  141.044648] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 4072 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1613
                 bpf_check+0x525e/0x5e60 kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5952
  [  141.047355] CPU: 3 PID: 4072 Comm: a.out Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4+ #51
  [  141.048446] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996),BIOS 1.10.2-1 04/01/2014
  [  141.049877] Call Trace:
  [  141.050324]  __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:77 [inline]
  [  141.050324]  dump_stack+0x1c9/0x2b4 lib/dump_stack.c:113
  [  141.050950]  ? dump_stack_print_info.cold.2+0x52/0x52 lib/dump_stack.c:60
  [  141.051837]  panic+0x238/0x4e7 kernel/panic.c:184
  [  141.052386]  ? add_taint.cold.5+0x16/0x16 kernel/panic.c:385
  [  141.053101]  ? __warn.cold.8+0x148/0x1ba kernel/panic.c:537
  [  141.053814]  ? __warn.cold.8+0x117/0x1ba kernel/panic.c:530
  [  141.054506]  ? get_callee_stack_depth kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1612 [inline]
  [  141.054506]  ? fixup_call_args kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5587 [inline]
  [  141.054506]  ? bpf_check+0x525e/0x5e60 kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5952
  [  141.055163]  __warn.cold.8+0x163/0x1ba kernel/panic.c:538
  [  141.055820]  ? get_callee_stack_depth kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1612 [inline]
  [  141.055820]  ? fixup_call_args kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5587 [inline]
  [  141.055820]  ? bpf_check+0x525e/0x5e60 kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5952
  [...]

What happens in jit_subprogs() is that kcalloc() for the subprog func
buffer is failing with NULL where we then bail out. Latter is a plain
return -ENOMEM, and this is definitely not okay since earlier in the
loop we are walking all subprogs and temporarily rewrite insn->off to
remember the subprog id as well as insn->imm to temporarily point the
call to __bpf_call_base + 1 for the initial JIT pass. Thus, bailing
out in such state and handing this over to the interpreter is troublesome
since later/subsequent e.g. find_subprog() lookups are based on wrong
insn->imm.

Therefore, once we hit this point, we need to jump to out_free path
where we undo all changes from earlier loop, so that interpreter can
work on unmodified insn->{off,imm}.

Another point is that should find_subprog() fail in jit_subprogs() due
to a verifier bug, then we also should not simply defer the program to
the interpreter since also here we did partial modifications. Instead
we should just bail out entirely and return an error to the user who is
trying to load the program.

Fixes: 1c2a088a6626 ("bpf: x64: add JIT support for multi-function programs")
Reported-by: syzbot+7d427828b2ea6e592804@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c |   11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -5349,6 +5349,10 @@ static int jit_subprogs(struct bpf_verif
 		if (insn->code != (BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL) ||
 		    insn->src_reg != BPF_PSEUDO_CALL)
 			continue;
+		/* Upon error here we cannot fall back to interpreter but
+		 * need a hard reject of the program. Thus -EFAULT is
+		 * propagated in any case.
+		 */
 		subprog = find_subprog(env, i + insn->imm + 1);
 		if (subprog < 0) {
 			WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier bug. No program starts at insn %d\n",
@@ -5369,7 +5373,7 @@ static int jit_subprogs(struct bpf_verif
 
 	func = kzalloc(sizeof(prog) * (env->subprog_cnt + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!func)
-		return -ENOMEM;
+		goto out_undo_insn;
 
 	for (i = 0; i <= env->subprog_cnt; i++) {
 		subprog_start = subprog_end;
@@ -5424,7 +5428,7 @@ static int jit_subprogs(struct bpf_verif
 		tmp = bpf_int_jit_compile(func[i]);
 		if (tmp != func[i] || func[i]->bpf_func != old_bpf_func) {
 			verbose(env, "JIT doesn't support bpf-to-bpf calls\n");
-			err = -EFAULT;
+			err = -ENOTSUPP;
 			goto out_free;
 		}
 		cond_resched();
@@ -5466,6 +5470,7 @@ out_free:
 		if (func[i])
 			bpf_jit_free(func[i]);
 	kfree(func);
+out_undo_insn:
 	/* cleanup main prog to be interpreted */
 	prog->jit_requested = 0;
 	for (i = 0, insn = prog->insnsi; i < prog->len; i++, insn++) {
@@ -5492,6 +5497,8 @@ static int fixup_call_args(struct bpf_ve
 		err = jit_subprogs(env);
 		if (err == 0)
 			return 0;
+		if (err == -EFAULT)
+			return err;
 	}
 #ifndef CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON
 	for (i = 0; i < prog->len; i++, insn++) {