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  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:   Sun, 8 Mar 2020 22:39:52 -0700
From:   Yonghong Song <>
To:     John Fastabend <>,
        <>, <>
CC:     <>, <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] bpf: verifier, do explicit u32 bounds tracking

On 3/6/20 4:22 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> John Fastabend wrote:
>> It is not possible for the current verifier to track u32 alu ops and jmps
>> correctly. This can result in the verifier aborting with errors even though
>> the program should be verifiable. Cilium code base has hit this but worked
>> around it by changing int variables to u64 variables and marking a few
>> things volatile. It would be better to avoid these tricks.
> Quick bit of clarification, originally I tried to just track u32 hence
> the title and above u32 reference. After runnning some programs I realized
> this wasn't really enough to handle all cases so I added the signed 32-bit
> bounds tracker. If I missed some spots in the descriptions that was just
> because I missed it in the proof reading here. u32 above should be 32-bit
> subreg.
> I also forgot to give Yonhong credit. Sorry Yonghong! The original alu ops
> tracking patch came from him.

John, thanks for working on this! Hopefully this will resolve tricky 
32bit subreg tracking issues. I will look at the RFC in the next couple 
of days!

Powered by blists - more mailing lists