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: <72e2ff187fb8cd031a6330e4c3cd8e66a0590fc1.camel@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 07 Aug 2023 17:45:56 +0300
From:   Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>
To:     yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
        syzbot <syzbot+d61b595e9205573133b3@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        andrii@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        daniel@...earbox.net, davem@...emloft.net, haoluo@...gle.com,
        hawk@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
        kpsingh@...nel.org, kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        martin.lau@...ux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
        song@...nel.org, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [bpf?] KMSAN: uninit-value in
 ieee802154_subif_start_xmit

On Mon, 2023-08-07 at 07:40 -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
> 
> On 8/7/23 6:11 AM, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> > On Sun, 2023-08-06 at 23:40 -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 8/6/23 4:23 PM, syzbot wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > syzbot found the following issue on:
> > > > 
> > > > HEAD commit:    25ad10658dc1 riscv, bpf: Adapt bpf trampoline to optimized..
> > > > git tree:       bpf-next
> > > > console+strace: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=147cbb29a80000
> > > > kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=8acaeb93ad7c6aaa
> > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=d61b595e9205573133b3
> > > > compiler:       gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > > > syz repro:      https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=14d73ccea80000
> > > > C reproducer:   https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1276aedea80000
> > > > 
> > > > Downloadable assets:
> > > > disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/3d378cc13d42/disk-25ad1065.raw.xz
> > > > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/44580fd5d1af/vmlinux-25ad1065.xz
> > > > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/840587618b41/bzImage-25ad1065.xz
> > > > 
> > > > The issue was bisected to:
> > > > 
> > > > commit 8100928c881482a73ed8bd499d602bab0fe55608
> > > > Author: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>
> > > > Date:   Fri Jul 28 01:12:02 2023 +0000
> > > > 
> > > >       bpf: Support new sign-extension mov insns
> > > 
> > > Thanks for reporting. I will look into this ASAP.
> > 
> > Hi Yonghong,
> > 
> > I guess it's your night and my morning, so I did some initial assessment.
> > The BPF program being loaded is:
> > 
> >    0 : (62) *(u32 *)(r10 -8) = 553656332
> >    1 : (bf) r1 = (s16)r10
> >    2 : (07) r1 += -8
> >    3 : (b7) r2 = 3
> >    4 : (bd) if r2 <= r1 goto pc+0
> >    5 : (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6
> >    6 : (b7) r0 = 0
> >    7 : (95) exit
> > 
> > (Note: when using bpftool (prog dump xlated id <some-id>) the disassembly
> >   of the instruction #1 is incorrectly printed as "1: (bf) r1 = r10")
> >   
> > The error occurs when instruction #5 (call to printk) is executed.
> > An incorrect address for the format string is passed to printk.
> > Disassembly of the jited program looks as follows:
> > 
> >    $ bpftool prog dump jited id <some-id>
> >    bpf_prog_ebeed182d92b487f:
> >       0: nopl    (%rax,%rax)
> >       5: nop
> >       7: pushq   %rbp
> >       8: movq    %rsp, %rbp
> >       b: subq    $8, %rsp
> >      12: movl    $553656332, -8(%rbp)
> >      19: movswq  %bp, %rdi            ; <---- Note movswq %bp !
> >      1d: addq    $-8, %rdi
> >      21: movl    $3, %esi
> >      26: cmpq    %rdi, %rsi
> >      29: jbe 0x2b
> >      2b: callq   0xffffffffe11c484c
> >      30: xorl    %eax, %eax
> >      32: leave
> >      33: retq
> > 
> > Note jit instruction #19 corresponding to BPF instruction #1, which
> > loads truncated and sign-extended value of %rbp's first byte as an
> > address of format string.
> > 
> > Here is how verifier log looks for (slightly modified) program:
> > 
> >    func#0 @0
> >    0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
> >    ; asm volatile ("			\n\
> >    0: (b7) r1 = 553656332                ; R1_w=553656332
> >    1: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -8) = r1         ; R1_w=553656332 R10=fp0 fp-8=553656332
> >    2: (bf) r1 = (s16)r10                 ; R1_w=fp0 R10=fp0
> >    3: (07) r1 += -8                      ; R1_w=fp-8
> >    4: (b7) r2 = 3                        ; R2_w=3
> >    5: (bd) if r2 <= r1 goto pc+0         ; R1_w=fp-8 R2_w=3
> >    6: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6
> >    mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 6 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1
> >    ...
> >    mark_precise: frame0: falling back to forcing all scalars precise
> >    7: R0=scalar()
> >    7: (b7) r0 = 0                        ; R0_w=0
> >    8: (95) exit
> >    
> >    from 5 to 6: R1_w=fp-8 R2_w=3 R10=fp0 fp-8=553656332
> >    6: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6
> >    mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 6 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1
> >    ...
> >    mark_precise: frame0: falling back to forcing all scalars precise
> >    7: safe
> > 
> > Note the following line:
> > 
> >    2: (bf) r1 = (s16)r10                 ; R1_w=fp0 R10=fp0
> > 
> > Verifier incorrectly marked r1 as fp0, hence not noticing the problem
> > with address passed to printk.
> 
> Thanks, Eduard. Right. I am also able to dump xlated code like
> below:
> 
>     0: (62) *(u32 *)(r10 -8) = 553656332
>     1: (bf) r1 = (s16)r10
>     2: (07) r1 += -8
>     3: (b7) r2 = 3
>     4: (bd) if r2 <= r1 goto pc+0
>     5: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#-138320
>     6: (b7) r0 = 0
>     7: (95) exit
> 
> Something like below can fix the problem,
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 132f25dab931..db72619551b2 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -13171,6 +13171,7 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verifier_env 
> *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
>                                          if (no_sext && need_id)
>                                                  src_reg->id = 
> ++env->id_gen;
>                                          copy_register_state(dst_reg, 
> src_reg);
> +                                       dst_reg->type = SCALAR_VALUE;
>                                          if (!no_sext)
>                                                  dst_reg->id = 0;
>                                          coerce_reg_to_size_sx(dst_reg, 
> insn->off >> 3);
> 
> After insn 1, we need change r1 type to SCALAR_VALUE. Will add
> the the test to selftest and submit the patch to fix the problem
> today.

Should this be an error?
Like in the same function but slightly below, when u32 moves are
processed:

    /* R1 = (u32) R2 */
    if (is_pointer_value(env, insn->src_reg)) {
        verbose(env,
            "R%d partial copy of pointer\n",
            insn->src_reg);
        return -EACCES;
    } else { ...

> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Eduard.
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > bisection log:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/bisect.txt?x=17970c5da80000
> > > > final oops:     https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/report.txt?x=14570c5da80000
> > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=10570c5da80000
> > > > 
> [...]

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ