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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu,  6 Aug 2020 11:29:39 -0700
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net resend] bitfield.h: don't compile-time validate _val in FIELD_FIT

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>

When ur_load_imm_any() is inlined into jeq_imm(), it's possible for the
compiler to deduce a case where _val can only have the value of -1 at
compile time. Specifically,

/* struct bpf_insn: _s32 imm */
u64 imm = insn->imm; /* sign extend */
if (imm >> 32) { /* non-zero only if insn->imm is negative */
  /* inlined from ur_load_imm_any */
  u32 __imm = imm >> 32; /* therefore, always 0xffffffff */
  if (__builtin_constant_p(__imm) && __imm > 255)
    compiletime_assert_XXX()

This can result in tripping a BUILD_BUG_ON() in __BF_FIELD_CHECK() that
checks that a given value is representable in one byte (interpreted as
unsigned).

FIELD_FIT() should return true or false at runtime for whether a value
can fit for not. Don't break the build over a value that's too large for
the mask. We'd prefer to keep the inlining and compiler optimizations
though we know this case will always return false.

Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening/CAK7LNASvb0UDJ0U5wkYYRzTAdnEs64HjXpEUL7d=V0CXiAXcNw@mail.gmail.com/
Reported-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Debugged-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Acked-by: Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
---
Note: resent patch 1/2 as per Jakub on
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200708230402.1644819-1-ndesaulniers@google.com/

 include/linux/bitfield.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bitfield.h b/include/linux/bitfield.h
index 48ea093ff04c..4e035aca6f7e 100644
--- a/include/linux/bitfield.h
+++ b/include/linux/bitfield.h
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
  */
 #define FIELD_FIT(_mask, _val)						\
 	({								\
-		__BF_FIELD_CHECK(_mask, 0ULL, _val, "FIELD_FIT: ");	\
+		__BF_FIELD_CHECK(_mask, 0ULL, 0ULL, "FIELD_FIT: ");	\
 		!((((typeof(_mask))_val) << __bf_shf(_mask)) & ~(_mask)); \
 	})
 
-- 
2.27.0.383.g050319c2ae-goog

Powered by blists - more mailing lists