[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMEtUux=mOyZkfxMWi3eA01TvmJrfJpeBpGcHvheptcckA=dzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 21:59:32 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: filter: initialize A and X registers
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:57 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 20:18:57 -0700
>
>> exisiting BPF verifier allows uninitialized access to registers,
>> 'ret A' is considered to be a valid filter.
>> So initialize A and X to zero to prevent leaking kernel memory
>> In the future BPF verifier will be rejecting such filters
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
>
> Has the code always been like this?
the previous interpreter had:
unsigned int sk_run_filter(const struct sk_buff *skb,
const struct sock_filter *fentry)
{
void *ptr;
u32 A = 0; /* Accumulator */
u32 X = 0; /* Index Register */
...
so it wasn't affected.
> Did the eBPF changes introduce this problem either directly or
> indirectly?
this bug is an oversight on my side.
I believe in the net-next it should be fixed by making verifier smarter
instead of wasting run time cycles to initialize regs.
For now the same fix is needed for both net and net-next.
We can remove extra assignments when verifier becomes smarter.
ebpf verifier that I posted earlier had checks for uninitialized regs and stack.
I missed lack of uninit regs part in classic verifier when ebpf verifier and jit
were dropped from the patch set.
Sorry about this slip.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists