Message-ID: <20180105054519.1885023-1-ast@fb.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jan 2018 21:45:19 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
To:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 bpf] bpf: prevent out-of-bounds speculation

From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>

Under speculation, CPUs may mis-predict branches in bounds checks. Thus,
memory accesses under a bounds check may be speculated even if the
bounds check fails, providing a primitive for building a side channel.

To avoid leaking kernel data round up array-based maps and mask the index
after bounds check, so speculated load with out of bounds index will load
either valid value from the array or zero from the padded area.

To avoid duplicating map_lookup functions for root/unpriv always generate
a sequence of bpf instructions equivalent to map_lookup function for
array and array_of_maps map types when map was created by unpriv user.
And unconditionally mask index for percpu_array, since it's fast enough,
even when max_entries are not rounded to power of 2 for root user,
since percpu_array doesn't have map_gen_lookup callback yet.

If prog_array map is created by unpriv user replace
  bpf_tail_call(ctx, map, index);
with
  if (index >= max_entries) {
    index &= map->index_mask;
    bpf_tail_call(ctx, map, index);
  }
(along with roundup to power 2) to prevent out-of-bounds speculation.
There is secondary redundant 'if (index >= max_entries)' in the interpreter
and in all JITs, but they can be optimized later if necessary.

Other array-like maps (cpumap, devmap, sockmap, perf_event_array, cgroup_array)
cannot be used by unpriv, so no changes there.

That fixes bpf side of "Variant 1: bounds check bypass (CVE-2017-5753)" on
all architectures with and without JIT.

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
---
v1->v2: no difference.
No idea why vger stopped liking my emails.
Resending for the 3rd time with tiny cc hoping that would do the trick.
I don't think I changed anything on my side.

 include/linux/bpf.h   |  2 ++
 kernel/bpf/arraymap.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 3 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index e55e4255a210..877eaa14a89b 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct bpf_map {
 	u32 pages;
 	u32 id;
 	int numa_node;
+	bool unpriv;
 	struct user_struct *user;
 	const struct bpf_map_ops *ops;
 	struct work_struct work;
@@ -221,6 +222,7 @@ struct bpf_prog_aux {
 struct bpf_array {
 	struct bpf_map map;
 	u32 elem_size;
+	u32 index_mask;
 	/* 'ownership' of prog_array is claimed by the first program that
 	 * is going to use this map or by the first program which FD is stored
 	 * in the map to make sure that all callers and callees have the same
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c
index 7c25426d3cf5..9937fdf0de68 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c
@@ -53,9 +53,10 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
 {
 	bool percpu = attr->map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY;
 	int numa_node = bpf_map_attr_numa_node(attr);
+	u32 elem_size, index_mask, max_entries;
+	bool unpriv = !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN);
 	struct bpf_array *array;
 	u64 array_size;
-	u32 elem_size;
 
 	/* check sanity of attributes */
 	if (attr->max_entries == 0 || attr->key_size != 4 ||
@@ -72,11 +73,20 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
 
 	elem_size = round_up(attr->value_size, 8);
 
+	max_entries = attr->max_entries;
+	index_mask = roundup_pow_of_two(max_entries) - 1;
+
+	if (unpriv)
+		/* round up array size to nearest power of 2,
+		 * since cpu will speculate within index_mask limits
+		 */
+		max_entries = index_mask + 1;
+
 	array_size = sizeof(*array);
 	if (percpu)
-		array_size += (u64) attr->max_entries * sizeof(void *);
+		array_size += (u64) max_entries * sizeof(void *);
 	else
-		array_size += (u64) attr->max_entries * elem_size;
+		array_size += (u64) max_entries * elem_size;
 
 	/* make sure there is no u32 overflow later in round_up() */
 	if (array_size >= U32_MAX - PAGE_SIZE)
@@ -86,6 +96,8 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
 	array = bpf_map_area_alloc(array_size, numa_node);
 	if (!array)
 		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+	array->index_mask = index_mask;
+	array->map.unpriv = unpriv;
 
 	/* copy mandatory map attributes */
 	array->map.map_type = attr->map_type;
@@ -127,6 +139,7 @@ static void *array_map_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
 /* emit BPF instructions equivalent to C code of array_map_lookup_elem() */
 static u32 array_map_gen_lookup(struct bpf_map *map, struct bpf_insn *insn_buf)
 {
+	struct bpf_array *array = container_of(map, struct bpf_array, map);
 	struct bpf_insn *insn = insn_buf;
 	u32 elem_size = round_up(map->value_size, 8);
 	const int ret = BPF_REG_0;
@@ -135,7 +148,12 @@ static u32 array_map_gen_lookup(struct bpf_map *map, struct bpf_insn *insn_buf)
 
 	*insn++ = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, map_ptr, offsetof(struct bpf_array, value));
 	*insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, ret, index, 0);
-	*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, ret, map->max_entries, 3);
+	if (map->unpriv) {
+		*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, ret, map->max_entries, 4);
+		*insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, ret, array->index_mask);
+	} else {
+		*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, ret, map->max_entries, 3);
+	}
 
 	if (is_power_of_2(elem_size)) {
 		*insn++ = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, ret, ilog2(elem_size));
@@ -157,7 +175,7 @@ static void *percpu_array_map_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
 	if (unlikely(index >= array->map.max_entries))
 		return NULL;
 
-	return this_cpu_ptr(array->pptrs[index]);
+	return this_cpu_ptr(array->pptrs[index & array->index_mask]);
 }
 
 int bpf_percpu_array_copy(struct bpf_map *map, void *key, void *value)
@@ -613,6 +631,7 @@ static void *array_of_map_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
 static u32 array_of_map_gen_lookup(struct bpf_map *map,
 				   struct bpf_insn *insn_buf)
 {
+	struct bpf_array *array = container_of(map, struct bpf_array, map);
 	u32 elem_size = round_up(map->value_size, 8);
 	struct bpf_insn *insn = insn_buf;
 	const int ret = BPF_REG_0;
@@ -621,7 +640,12 @@ static u32 array_of_map_gen_lookup(struct bpf_map *map,
 
 	*insn++ = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, map_ptr, offsetof(struct bpf_array, value));
 	*insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, ret, index, 0);
-	*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, ret, map->max_entries, 5);
+	if (map->unpriv) {
+		*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, ret, map->max_entries, 6);
+		*insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, ret, array->index_mask);
+	} else {
+		*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, ret, map->max_entries, 5);
+	}
 	if (is_power_of_2(elem_size))
 		*insn++ = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, ret, ilog2(elem_size));
 	else
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 04b24876cd23..f3a2de94d73b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1729,6 +1729,13 @@ static int check_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int func_id, int insn_idx)
 	err = check_func_arg(env, BPF_REG_2, fn->arg2_type, &meta);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
+	if (func_id == BPF_FUNC_tail_call) {
+		if (meta.map_ptr == NULL) {
+			verbose(env, "verifier bug\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
+		env->insn_aux_data[insn_idx].map_ptr = meta.map_ptr;
+	}
 	err = check_func_arg(env, BPF_REG_3, fn->arg3_type, &meta);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
@@ -4456,19 +4463,55 @@ static int fixup_bpf_calls(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 			 */
 			insn->imm = 0;
 			insn->code = BPF_JMP | BPF_TAIL_CALL;
+
+			/* instead of changing every JIT dealing with tail_call
+			 * emit two extra insns:
+			 * if (index >= max_entries) goto out;
+			 * index &= array->index_mask;
+			 * to avoid out-of-bounds cpu speculation
+			 */
+			map_ptr = env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].map_ptr;
+			if (map_ptr == BPF_MAP_PTR_POISON) {
+				verbose(env, "tail_call obusing map_ptr\n");
+				return -EINVAL;
+			}
+			if (!map_ptr->unpriv)
+				continue;
+			insn_buf[0] = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3,
+						  map_ptr->max_entries, 2);
+			insn_buf[1] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_3,
+						    container_of(map_ptr,
+								 struct bpf_array,
+								 map)->index_mask);
+			insn_buf[2] = *insn;
+			cnt = 3;
+			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt);
+			if (!new_prog)
+				return -ENOMEM;
+
+			delta    += cnt - 1;
+			env->prog = prog = new_prog;
+			insn      = new_prog->insnsi + i + delta;
 			continue;
 		}
 
 		/* BPF_EMIT_CALL() assumptions in some of the map_gen_lookup
 		 * handlers are currently limited to 64 bit only.
 		 */
-		if (ebpf_jit_enabled() && BITS_PER_LONG == 64 &&
-		    insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem) {
+		if (insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem) {
 			map_ptr = env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].map_ptr;
 			if (map_ptr == BPF_MAP_PTR_POISON ||
 			    !map_ptr->ops->map_gen_lookup)
 				goto patch_call_imm;
 
+			/* for unpriv map the verifier should emit bpf insns
+			 * instead of map_lookup call regardless of JIT on/off
+			 * and 32/64 bit
+			 */
+			if (!map_ptr->unpriv &&
+			    !(ebpf_jit_enabled() && BITS_PER_LONG == 64))
+				goto patch_call_imm;
+
 			cnt = map_ptr->ops->map_gen_lookup(map_ptr, insn_buf);
 			if (cnt == 0 || cnt >= ARRAY_SIZE(insn_buf)) {
 				verbose(env, "bpf verifier is misconfigured\n");
-- 
2.9.5

Powered by blists - more mailing lists