netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: filter: initialize A and X registers

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: <53577181.1000406@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:53:37 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: filter: initialize A and X registers

On 04/23/2014 05:18 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> 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>
> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>

I gave it some more thought, it's actually more than just 'ret A'
from your description, user programs could be used to generate code
like 'add X' or 'add #42' instead of a txa or load instruction [where
A is previously uninitialized], as it was always initialized to 0
before. We prevent to do a 'ret X', but X could be uninitialized and
then transferred over to taint A etc. So yeah, this patch is the most
simple way to prevent that w/o huge complexity. Therefore, it's
better this way:

Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
--
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