| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <aOfGZvSxC8X2h8Zb@boxer>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2025 16:27:50 +0200
From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
CC: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>, Stanislav Fomichev
<sdf@...ichev.me>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann
<daniel@...earbox.net>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, "John
Fastabend" <john.fastabend@...il.com>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman
<horms@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
<nxne.cnse.osdt.itp.upstreaming@...el.com>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>,
<stable@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] xsk: harden userspace-supplied &xdp_desc validation
On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 06:56:59PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> Turned out certain clearly invalid values passed in &xdp_desc from
> userspace can pass xp_{,un}aligned_validate_desc() and then lead
> to UBs or just invalid frames to be queued for xmit.
>
> desc->len close to ``U32_MAX`` with a non-zero pool->tx_metadata_len
> can cause positive integer overflow and wraparound, the same way low
> enough desc->addr with a non-zero pool->tx_metadata_len can cause
> negative integer overflow. Both scenarios can then pass the
> validation successfully.
Hmm, when underflow happens the addr would be enormous, passing
existing validation would really be rare. However let us fix it while at
it.
> This doesn't happen with valid XSk applications, but can be used
> to perform attacks.
>
> Always promote desc->len to ``u64`` first to exclude positive
> overflows of it. Use explicit check_{add,sub}_overflow() when
> validating desc->addr (which is ``u64`` already).
>
> bloat-o-meter reports a little growth of the code size:
>
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 2/1 up/down: 60/-16 (44)
> Function old new delta
> xskq_cons_peek_desc 299 330 +31
> xsk_tx_peek_release_desc_batch 973 1002 +29
> xsk_generic_xmit 3148 3132 -16
>
> but hopefully this doesn't hurt the performance much.
Let us be fully transparent and link the previous discussion here?
I was commenting that breaking up single statement to multiple branches
might affect subtly performance as this code is executed per each
descriptor. Jason tested copy+aligned mode, let us see if zc+unaligned
mode is affected.
<rant>
I am also thinking about test side, but xsk tx metadata came with a
separate test (xdp_hw_metadata), which was rather about testing positive
cases. That is probably a separate discussion, but metadata negative
tests should appear somewhere, I suppose xskxceiver would be a good fit,
but then, should we merge the existing logic from xdp_hw_metadata?
</rant>
>
> Fixes: 341ac980eab9 ("xsk: Support tx_metadata_len")
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 6.8+
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
> ---
> net/xdp/xsk_queue.h | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h b/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
> index f16f390370dc..1eb8d9f8b104 100644
> --- a/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
> +++ b/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
> @@ -143,14 +143,24 @@ static inline bool xp_unused_options_set(u32 options)
> static inline bool xp_aligned_validate_desc(struct xsk_buff_pool *pool,
> struct xdp_desc *desc)
> {
> - u64 addr = desc->addr - pool->tx_metadata_len;
> - u64 len = desc->len + pool->tx_metadata_len;
> - u64 offset = addr & (pool->chunk_size - 1);
> + u64 len = desc->len;
> + u64 addr, offset;
>
> - if (!desc->len)
> + if (!len)
This is yet another thing being fixed here as for non-zero tx_metadata_len
we were allowing 0 length descriptors... :< overall feels like we relied
too much on contract with userspace WRT descriptor layout.
If zc perf is fine, then:
Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>
> return false;
>
> - if (offset + len > pool->chunk_size)
> + /* Can overflow if desc->addr < pool->tx_metadata_len */
> + if (check_sub_overflow(desc->addr, pool->tx_metadata_len, &addr))
> + return false;
> +
> + offset = addr & (pool->chunk_size - 1);
> +
> + /*
> + * Can't overflow: @offset is guaranteed to be < ``U32_MAX``
> + * (pool->chunk_size is ``u32``), @len is guaranteed
> + * to be <= ``U32_MAX``.
> + */
> + if (offset + len + pool->tx_metadata_len > pool->chunk_size)
> return false;
>
> if (addr >= pool->addrs_cnt)
> @@ -158,27 +168,42 @@ static inline bool xp_aligned_validate_desc(struct xsk_buff_pool *pool,
>
> if (xp_unused_options_set(desc->options))
> return false;
> +
> return true;
> }
>
> static inline bool xp_unaligned_validate_desc(struct xsk_buff_pool *pool,
> struct xdp_desc *desc)
> {
> - u64 addr = xp_unaligned_add_offset_to_addr(desc->addr) - pool->tx_metadata_len;
> - u64 len = desc->len + pool->tx_metadata_len;
> + u64 len = desc->len;
> + u64 addr, end;
>
> - if (!desc->len)
> + if (!len)
> return false;
>
> + /* Can't overflow: @len is guaranteed to be <= ``U32_MAX`` */
> + len += pool->tx_metadata_len;
> if (len > pool->chunk_size)
> return false;
>
> - if (addr >= pool->addrs_cnt || addr + len > pool->addrs_cnt ||
> - xp_desc_crosses_non_contig_pg(pool, addr, len))
> + /* Can overflow if desc->addr is close to 0 */
> + if (check_sub_overflow(xp_unaligned_add_offset_to_addr(desc->addr),
> + pool->tx_metadata_len, &addr))
> + return false;
> +
> + if (addr >= pool->addrs_cnt)
> + return false;
> +
> + /* Can overflow if pool->addrs_cnt is high enough */
> + if (check_add_overflow(addr, len, &end) || end > pool->addrs_cnt)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (xp_desc_crosses_non_contig_pg(pool, addr, len))
> return false;
>
> if (xp_unused_options_set(desc->options))
> return false;
> +
> return true;
> }
>
> --
> 2.51.0
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists