netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: allow rewriting to ports under ip_unprivileged_port

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: <20210125232500.fmb4trbady6jfdfp@kafai-mbp>
Date:   Mon, 25 Jan 2021 15:25:00 -0800
From:   Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
To:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <ast@...nel.org>,
        <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrey Ignatov <rdna@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: allow rewriting to ports under
 ip_unprivileged_port_start

On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 09:26:40AM -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> At the moment, BPF_CGROUP_INET{4,6}_BIND hooks can rewrite user_port
> to the privileged ones (< ip_unprivileged_port_start), but it will
> be rejected later on in the __inet_bind or __inet6_bind.
> 
> Let's export 'port_changed' event from the BPF program and bypass
> ip_unprivileged_port_start range check when we've seen that
> the program explicitly overrode the port. This is accomplished
> by generating instructions to set ctx->port_changed along with
> updating ctx->user_port.
The description requires an update.

[ ... ]

> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c b/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
> index da649f20d6b2..cdf3c7e611d9 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
> @@ -1055,6 +1055,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cgroup_bpf_run_filter_sk);
>   * @uaddr: sockaddr struct provided by user
>   * @type: The type of program to be exectuted
>   * @t_ctx: Pointer to attach type specific context
> + * @flags: Pointer to u32 which contains higher bits of BPF program
> + *         return value (OR'ed together).
>   *
>   * socket is expected to be of type INET or INET6.
>   *
> @@ -1064,7 +1066,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cgroup_bpf_run_filter_sk);
>  int __cgroup_bpf_run_filter_sock_addr(struct sock *sk,
>  				      struct sockaddr *uaddr,
>  				      enum bpf_attach_type type,
> -				      void *t_ctx)
> +				      void *t_ctx,
> +				      u32 *flags)
>  {
>  	struct bpf_sock_addr_kern ctx = {
>  		.sk = sk,
> @@ -1087,7 +1090,8 @@ int __cgroup_bpf_run_filter_sock_addr(struct sock *sk,
>  	}
>  
>  	cgrp = sock_cgroup_ptr(&sk->sk_cgrp_data);
> -	ret = BPF_PROG_RUN_ARRAY(cgrp->bpf.effective[type], &ctx, BPF_PROG_RUN);
> +	ret = BPF_PROG_RUN_ARRAY_FLAGS(cgrp->bpf.effective[type], &ctx,
> +				       BPF_PROG_RUN, flags);
>  
>  	return ret == 1 ? 0 : -EPERM;
>  }
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index d0eae51b31e4..ef7c3ca53214 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -7986,6 +7986,11 @@ static int check_return_code(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  		    env->prog->expected_attach_type == BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETSOCKNAME ||
>  		    env->prog->expected_attach_type == BPF_CGROUP_INET6_GETSOCKNAME)
>  			range = tnum_range(1, 1);
> +		if (env->prog->expected_attach_type == BPF_CGROUP_INET4_BIND ||
> +		    env->prog->expected_attach_type == BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND) {
> +			range = tnum_range(0, 3);
> +			enforce_attach_type_range = tnum_range(0, 3);
It should be:
			enforce_attach_type_range = tnum_range(2, 3);