netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Check sk_fullsock() before returning from bpf_sk

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: <20190519020703.nbioindo5krpgupi@kafai-mbp>
Date:   Sun, 19 May 2019 02:07:29 +0000
From:   Martin Lau <kafai@...com>
To:     Joe Stringer <joe@...valent.com>
CC:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Check sk_fullsock() before returning from
 bpf_sk_lookup()

On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 06:52:48PM -0700, Joe Stringer wrote:
> On Sat, May 18, 2019, 09:05 Martin Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 08:38:46AM -1000, Joe Stringer wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 17, 2019, 12:02 Martin Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 02:51:48PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/17/19 2:21 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > > > > > The BPF_FUNC_sk_lookup_xxx helpers return RET_PTR_TO_SOCKET_OR_NULL.
> > > > > > Meaning a fullsock ptr and its fullsock's fields in bpf_sock can be
> > > > > > accessed, e.g. type, protocol, mark and priority.
> > > > > > Some new helper, like bpf_sk_storage_get(), also expects
> > > > > > ARG_PTR_TO_SOCKET is a fullsock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > bpf_sk_lookup() currently calls sk_to_full_sk() before returning.
> > > > > > However, the ptr returned from sk_to_full_sk() is not guaranteed
> > > > > > to be a fullsock.  For example, it cannot get a fullsock if sk
> > > > > > is in TCP_TIME_WAIT.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This patch checks for sk_fullsock() before returning. If it is not
> > > > > > a fullsock, sock_gen_put() is called if needed and then returns NULL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fixes: 6acc9b432e67 ("bpf: Add helper to retrieve socket in BPF")
> > > > > > Cc: Joe Stringer <joe@...valent.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  net/core/filter.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> > > > > > index 55bfc941d17a..85def5a20aaf 100644
> > > > > > --- a/net/core/filter.c
> > > > > > +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> > > > > > @@ -5337,8 +5337,14 @@ __bpf_sk_lookup(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
> > > > bpf_sock_tuple *tuple, u32 len,
> > > > > >     struct sock *sk = __bpf_skc_lookup(skb, tuple, len, caller_net,
> > > > > >                                        ifindex, proto, netns_id,
> > > > flags);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -   if (sk)
> > > > > > +   if (sk) {
> > > > > >             sk = sk_to_full_sk(sk);
> > > > > > +           if (!sk_fullsock(sk)) {
> > > > > > +                   if (!sock_flag(sk, SOCK_RCU_FREE))
> > > > > > +                           sock_gen_put(sk);
> > > > >
> > > > > This looks a bit convoluted/weird.
> > > > >
> > > > > What about telling/asking __bpf_skc_lookup() to not return a non
> > > > fullsock instead ?
> > > > It is becausee some other helpers, like BPF_FUNC_skc_lookup_tcp,
> > > > can return non fullsock
> > > >
> > >
> > > FYI this is necessary for finding a transparently proxied socket for a
> > > non-local connection (tproxy use case).
> > You meant it is necessary to return a non fullsock from the
> > BPF_FUNC_sk_lookup_xxx helpers?
> 
> Yes, that's what I want to associate with the skb so that the delivery
> to the SO_TRANSPARENT is received properly.
> 
> For the first packet of a connection, we look up the socket using the
> tproxy socket port as the destination, and deliver the packet there.
> The SO_TRANSPARENT logic then kicks in and sends back the ack and
> creates the non-full sock for the connection tuple, which can be
> entirely unrelated to local addresses or ports.
> 
> For the second forward-direction packet, (ie ACK in 3-way handshake)
> then we must deliver the packet to this non-full sock as that's what
> is negotiating the proxied connection. If you look up using the packet
> tuple then get the full sock from it, it will go back to the
> SO_TRANSPARENT parent socket. Delivering the ACK there will result in
> a RST being sent back, because the SO_TRANSPARENT socket is just there
> to accept new connections for connections to be proxied. So this is
> the case where I need the non-full sock.
> 
> (In practice, the lookup logic attempts the packet tuple first then if
> that fails, uses the tproxy port for lookup to achieve the above).
hmm...I am likely missing something.

1) The above can be done by the "BPF_FUNC_skC_lookup_tcp" which
   returns a non fullsock (RET_PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON_OR_NULL), no?

2) The bpf_func_proto of "BPF_FUNC_sk_lookup_tcp" returns
   fullsock (RET_PTR_TO_SOCKET_OR_NULL) and the bpf_prog (and
   the verifier) is expecting that.  How to address the bug here?