linux-kernel - [PATCH bpf-next v5 0/4] bpf: support to track 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 21:47:56 +0800
From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
To: andrii@...nel.org,
	eddyz87@...il.com,
	yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
	alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Cc: ast@...nel.org,
	daniel@...earbox.net,
	john.fastabend@...il.com,
	martin.lau@...ux.dev,
	song@...nel.org,
	kpsingh@...nel.org,
	sdf@...gle.com,
	haoluo@...gle.com,
	jolsa@...nel.org,
	mykolal@...com,
	shuah@...nel.org,
	menglong8.dong@...il.com,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v5 0/4] bpf: support to track BPF_JNE

For now, the reg bounds is not handled for BPF_JNE case, which can cause
the failure of following case:

  /* The type of "a" is u32 */
  if (a > 0 && a < 100) {
    /* the range of the register for a is [0, 99], not [1, 99],
     * and will cause the following error:
     *
     *   invalid zero-sized read
     *
     * as a can be 0.
     */
    bpf_skb_store_bytes(skb, xx, xx, a, 0);
  }

In the code above, "a > 0" will be compiled to "if a == 0 goto xxx". In
the TRUE branch, the dst_reg will be marked as known to 0. However, in the
fallthrough(FALSE) branch, the dst_reg will not be handled, which makes
the [min, max] for a is [0, 99], not [1, 99].

In the 1st patch, we reduce the range of the dst reg if the src reg is a
const and is exactly the edge of the dst reg For BPF_JNE.

In the 2nd patch, we remove reduplicated s32 casting in "crafted_cases".

In the 3rd patch, we just activate the test case for this logic in
range_cond(), which is committed by Andrii in the
commit 8863238993e2 ("selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester").

In the 4th patch, we convert the case above to a testcase and add it to
verifier_bounds.c.

Changes since v4:
- add the 2nd patch
- add "{U32, U32, {0, U32_MAX}, {U32_MAX, U32_MAX}}" that we missed in the
  3rd patch
- add some comments to the function that we add in the 4th patch
- add reg_not_equal_const() in the 4th patch

Changes since v3:
- do some adjustment to the crafted cases that we added in the 2nd patch
- add the 3rd patch

Changes since v2:
- fix a typo in the subject of the 1st patch
- add some comments to the 1st patch, as Eduard advised
- add some cases to the "crafted_cases"

Changes since v1:
- simplify the code in the 1st patch
- introduce the 2nd patch for the testing

Menglong Dong (4):
  bpf: make the verifier tracks the "not equal" for regs
  selftests/bpf: remove reduplicated s32 casting in "crafted_cases"
  selftests/bpf: activate the OP_NE logic in range_cond()
  selftests/bpf: add testcase to verifier_bounds.c for BPF_JNE

 kernel/bpf/verifier.c                         | 38 +++++++++++-
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c     | 27 +++++---
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c     | 62 +++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

-- 
2.39.2