[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171018.132137.556352005997756075.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 13:21:37 +0100 (WEST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net,
ecree@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] bpf: disallow arithmetic operations on context
pointer
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 11:16:55 -0700
> Commit f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking")
> removed the crafty selection of which pointer types are
> allowed to be modified. This is OK for most pointer types
> since adjust_ptr_min_max_vals() will catch operations on
> immutable pointers. One exception is PTR_TO_CTX which is
> now allowed to be offseted freely.
>
> The intent of aforementioned commit was to allow context
> access via modified registers. The offset passed to
> ->is_valid_access() verifier callback has been adjusted
> by the value of the variable offset.
>
> What is missing, however, is taking the variable offset
> into account when the context register is used. Or in terms
> of the code adding the offset to the value passed to the
> ->convert_ctx_access() callback. This leads to the following
> eBPF user code:
>
> r1 += 68
> r0 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
> exit
>
> being translated to this in kernel space:
>
> 0: (07) r1 += 68
> 1: (61) r0 = *(u32 *)(r1 +180)
> 2: (95) exit
>
> Offset 8 is corresponding to 180 in the kernel, but offset
> 76 is valid too. Verifier will "accept" access to offset
> 68+8=76 but then "convert" access to offset 8 as 180.
> Effective access to offset 248 is beyond the kernel context.
> (This is a __sk_buff example on a debug-heavy kernel -
> packet mark is 8 -> 180, 76 would be data.)
>
> Dereferencing the modified context pointer is not as easy
> as dereferencing other types, because we have to translate
> the access to reading a field in kernel structures which is
> usually at a different offset and often of a different size.
> To allow modifying the pointer we would have to make sure
> that given eBPF instruction will always access the same
> field or the fields accessed are "compatible" in terms of
> offset and size...
>
> Disallow dereferencing modified context pointers and add
> to selftests the test case described here.
>
> Fixes: f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking")
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Applied.
> ---
> Dave, a merge note - in net-next this will need env to be passed
> to verbose().
Thanks for the note.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists