netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf: test_verifier, test for lookup on queue/stack maps

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d523cbcc-92f0-baf2-222d-a1d6d7a94aa7@polito.it>
Date:   Wed, 28 Nov 2018 08:06:17 -0500
From:   Mauricio Vasquez <mauricio.vasquez@...ito.it>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Prashant Bhole <bhole_prashant_q7@....ntt.co.jp>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf: test_verifier, test for lookup on
 queue/stack maps


On 11/28/18 3:45 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 11/28/2018 08:51 AM, Prashant Bhole wrote:
>> This patch adds tests to check whether bpf verifier prevents lookup
>> on queue/stack maps
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Prashant Bhole <bhole_prashant_q7@....ntt.co.jp>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
>> index 550b7e46bf4a..becd9f4f3980 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
>> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ struct bpf_test {
>>   	int fixup_map_in_map[MAX_FIXUPS];
>>   	int fixup_cgroup_storage[MAX_FIXUPS];
>>   	int fixup_percpu_cgroup_storage[MAX_FIXUPS];
>> +	int fixup_map_queue[MAX_FIXUPS];
>> +	int fixup_map_stack[MAX_FIXUPS];
>>   	const char *errstr;
>>   	const char *errstr_unpriv;
>>   	uint32_t retval, retval_unpriv;
>> @@ -4611,6 +4613,38 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
>>   		.errstr = "cannot pass map_type 7 into func bpf_map_lookup_elem",
>>   		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
>>   	},
>> +	{
>> +		"prevent map lookup in queue map",
>> +		.insns = {
>> +			BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
>> +			BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
>> +			BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
>> +			BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
>> +			BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
>> +				     BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
>> +			BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
>> +		},
>> +		.fixup_map_queue = { 3 },
>> +		.result = REJECT,
>> +		.errstr = "invalid stack type R2 off=-8 access_size=0",
>> +		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
> Hmm, the approach in patch 1 is very fragile, and we're lucky in this case
> that the verifier bailed out with 'invalid stack type R2 off=-8 access_size=0'
> because of key size being zero. If this would have not been the case then
> the added ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP) would basically be seen as a valid pointer and
> the program could read/write into it. Instead, this needs to be prevented much
> earlier like check_map_func_compatibility(),

Actually it is prevented in check_map_func_compatibility(), but stack 
boundary check is done before in the verifier.

> and I would like to have a split
> on these approaches to make verifier more robust. While you want ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP)
> for user space syscall side,

In the case of QUEUE and STACK maps this is not relevant because the 
lookup syscall is mapped into peek operation.

In fact queue_stack_map_lookup_elem() & queue_stack_map_update_elem() 
should be never called, I think we can remove them safely.

Mauricio.

> the BPF prog should only ever see (if anything)
> a NULL here, because this is what the verifier matches later on to set the map
> value_or_null pointer to a map value pointer.
>
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		"prevent map lookup in stack map",
>> +		.insns = {
>> +			BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
>> +			BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
>> +			BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
>> +			BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
>> +			BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
>> +				     BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
>> +			BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
>> +		},
>> +		.fixup_map_stack = { 3 },
>> +		.result = REJECT,
>> +		.errstr = "invalid stack type R2 off=-8 access_size=0",
>> +		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
>> +	},
>>   	{
>>   		"prevent map lookup in prog array",
>>   		.insns = {
>> @@ -14048,6 +14082,8 @@ static void do_test_fixup(struct bpf_test *test, enum bpf_map_type prog_type,
>>   	int *fixup_map_sockhash = test->fixup_map_sockhash;
>>   	int *fixup_map_xskmap = test->fixup_map_xskmap;
>>   	int *fixup_map_stacktrace = test->fixup_map_stacktrace;
>> +	int *fixup_map_queue = test->fixup_map_queue;
>> +	int *fixup_map_stack = test->fixup_map_stack;
>>   	int *fixup_prog1 = test->fixup_prog1;
>>   	int *fixup_prog2 = test->fixup_prog2;
>>   	int *fixup_map_in_map = test->fixup_map_in_map;
>> @@ -14168,6 +14204,22 @@ static void do_test_fixup(struct bpf_test *test, enum bpf_map_type prog_type,
>>   			fixup_map_stacktrace++;
>>   		} while (fixup_map_stacktrace);
>>   	}
>> +	if (*fixup_map_queue) {
>> +		map_fds[13] = create_map(BPF_MAP_TYPE_QUEUE, 0,
>> +					 sizeof(u32), 1);
>> +		do {
>> +			prog[*fixup_map_queue].imm = map_fds[13];
>> +			fixup_map_queue++;
>> +		} while (*fixup_map_queue);
>> +	}
>> +	if (*fixup_map_stack) {
>> +		map_fds[14] = create_map(BPF_MAP_TYPE_STACK, 0,
>> +					 sizeof(u32), 1);
>> +		do {
>> +			prog[*fixup_map_stack].imm = map_fds[14];
>> +			fixup_map_stack++;
>> +		} while (*fixup_map_stack);
>> +	}
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int set_admin(bool admin)
>>
>