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]
Date:	Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:53:18 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <>
Cc:	David Miller <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Steven Rostedt <>,
	Daniel Borkmann <>,
	Chema Gonzalez <>,
	Eric Dumazet <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Brendan Gregg <>,
	Namhyung Kim <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kees Cook <>,
	Linux API <>,
	Network Development <>,
	LKML <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 1/6] net: filter: add "load 64-bit immediate"
 eBPF instruction

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:06 PM, David Miller <> wrote:
>>> From: Alexei Starovoitov <>
>>> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:00:53 -0700
>>>> add BPF_LD_IMM64 instruction to load 64-bit immediate value into a register.
>>> I think you need to rethink this.
>>> I understand that you want to be able to compile arbitrary C code into
>>> eBPF, but you have to restrict strongly what data the eBPF code can get
>>> to.
>> I believe verifier already does restrict it. I don't see any holes in
>> the architecture. I'm probably not explaining it clearly though :(
>>> Arbitrary pointer loads is asking for trouble.
>> Of course.
>> There is no arbitrary pointer from user space.
>> Verifier checks all pointers.
>> I guess this commit log description is confusing.
>> It says:
>> BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, const_imm_map_ptr)
>> that's what appears in the program _after_ it goes through verifier.
>> User space cannot pass a pointer into the kernel.
> If you don't intend for userspace to load a program that contains this
> instruction, then why does it need to be an instruction that the
> verifier rewrites?  Why not have an instruction "load immediate

user space use _pseudo_ bpf_ld_imm64 instruction.
_pseudo_ stands for using 'map_fd' as imm instead of pointer.

> relocated pointer" that contains a reference to a relocation table and

Andy, I guess you missed explanation in:
Obviously user space doesn't know what kernel map pointer is associated
with process-local map-FD.
So it's using pseudo BPF_LD_IMM64 instruction.
BPF_LD_IMM64 with src_reg == 0 -> generic move 64-bit immediate into dst_reg
BPF_LD_IMM64 with src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD -> mov map_fd into dst_reg
Other values are reserved for now. (They will be used to implement
global variables, strings and other constants and per-cpu areas in the future)
So the programs look like:
  BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, process_local_map_fd),
eBPF verifier scans the program for such pseudo instructions, converts
process_local_map_fd -> in-kernel map pointer
and drops 'pseudo' flag of BPF_LD_IMM64 instruction.

To rephrase it differently.
  BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, process_local_map_fd),
is very much what you suggesting by "load immediate relocated pointer"

> have the JIT do it?  That might be easier to understand than having
> the verifier do it, and it'll avoid committing to ABIs before we need
> them.

that part I don't understand.
The patch that handles pseudo_with_map_fd ->
-> normal_with_kernel_pointer conversion is only 147 lines:
Cannot think of shorter version.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists