linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/13] uprobes: Add arch_uprobe_verify

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: <CAEf4BzZ+nkvZFADq9HzLUUcDGNa44G+hPfzOhUexKW7WqBxS6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 13:11:30 -0800
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, 
	Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, 
	Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/13] uprobes: Add arch_uprobe_verify_opcode function

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 5:21 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 04:48:05PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 5:34 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Adding arch_uprobe_verify_opcode function, so we can overload
> > > verification for each architecture in following changes.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/uprobes.h |  5 +++++
> > >  kernel/events/uprobes.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
> > >  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h
> > > index cc723bc48c1d..8843b7f99ed0 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/uprobes.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h
> > > @@ -215,6 +215,11 @@ extern void uprobe_handle_trampoline(struct pt_regs *regs);
> > >  extern void *arch_uretprobe_trampoline(unsigned long *psize);
> > >  extern unsigned long uprobe_get_trampoline_vaddr(void);
> > >  extern void uprobe_copy_from_page(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr, void *dst, int len);
> > > +extern int uprobe_verify_opcode(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr, uprobe_opcode_t *new_opcode);
> > > +extern int arch_uprobe_verify_opcode(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct page *page,
> > > +                                    unsigned long vaddr, uprobe_opcode_t *new_opcode,
> > > +                                    int nbytes);
> > > +extern bool arch_uprobe_is_register(uprobe_opcode_t *insn, int nbytes);
> > >  #else /* !CONFIG_UPROBES */
> > >  struct uprobes_state {
> > >  };
> > > diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > > index 7c2ecf11a573..8068f91de9e3 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > > @@ -263,7 +263,13 @@ static void uprobe_copy_to_page(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr, const vo
> > >         kunmap_atomic(kaddr);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -static int verify_opcode(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr, uprobe_opcode_t *new_opcode)
> > > +__weak bool arch_uprobe_is_register(uprobe_opcode_t *insn, int nbytes)
> > > +{
> > > +       return is_swbp_insn(insn);
> >
> > a bit weird that we ignore nbytes here... should we have nbytes ==
> > UPROBE_SWBP_INSN_SIZE check somewhere here or inside is_swbp_insn()?
>
> the original is_swbp_insn function does not need that and we need
> nbytes in the overloaded arch_uprobe_is_register to distinguish
> between 1 byte and 5 byte update..
>

and that's my point, if some architecture forgot to override it for
nop5 (or similar stuff), this default implementation should reject
instruction that's not an original nop, no?


> jirka
>
> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +int uprobe_verify_opcode(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr,
> > > +                        uprobe_opcode_t *new_opcode)
> > >  {
> > >         uprobe_opcode_t old_opcode;
> > >         bool is_swbp;
> > > @@ -291,6 +297,13 @@ static int verify_opcode(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr, uprobe_opcode_t
> > >         return 1;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +__weak int arch_uprobe_verify_opcode(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct page *page,
> > > +                                    unsigned long vaddr, uprobe_opcode_t *new_opcode,
> > > +                                    int nbytes)
> > > +{
> > > +       return uprobe_verify_opcode(page, vaddr, new_opcode);
> >
> > again, dropping nbytes on the floor here
> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static struct delayed_uprobe *
> > >  delayed_uprobe_check(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm)
> > >  {
> > > @@ -479,7 +492,7 @@ int uprobe_write_opcode(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct mm_struct *mm,
> > >         bool orig_page_huge = false;
> > >         unsigned int gup_flags = FOLL_FORCE;
> > >
> > > -       is_register = is_swbp_insn(insn);
> > > +       is_register = arch_uprobe_is_register(insn, nbytes);
> > >         uprobe = container_of(auprobe, struct uprobe, arch);
> > >
> > >  retry:
> > > @@ -490,7 +503,7 @@ int uprobe_write_opcode(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct mm_struct *mm,
> > >         if (IS_ERR(old_page))
> > >                 return PTR_ERR(old_page);
> > >
> > > -       ret = verify_opcode(old_page, vaddr, insn);
> > > +       ret = arch_uprobe_verify_opcode(auprobe, old_page, vaddr, insn, nbytes);
> > >         if (ret <= 0)
> > >                 goto put_old;
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.47.0
> > >