netdev - [PATCH] bpf: Fix mask generation for 32-bit narrow loads of 64-bit fields

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20230502165754.16728-1-will@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue,  2 May 2023 17:57:54 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@...volk.io>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Andrey Ignatov <rdna@...com>
Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Fix mask generation for 32-bit narrow loads of 64-bit fields

A narrow load from a 64-bit context field results in a 64-bit load
followed potentially by a 64-bit right-shift and then a bitwise AND
operation to extract the relevant data.

In the case of a 32-bit access, an immediate mask of 0xffffffff is used
to construct a 64-bit BPP_AND operation which then sign-extends the mask
value and effectively acts as a glorified no-op.

Fix the mask generation so that narrow loads always perform a 32-bit AND
operation.

Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@...volk.io>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc: Andrey Ignatov <rdna@...com>
Fixes: 31fd85816dbe ("bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields")
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
---

I spotted this while playing around with the JIT on arm64. I can't
figure out why 31fd85816dbe special-cases 8-byte ctx fields in the
first place, so I fear I may be missing something...

 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index fbcf5a4e2fcd..5871aa78d01a 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -17033,7 +17033,7 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 					insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH,
 									insn->dst_reg,
 									shift);
-				insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, insn->dst_reg,
+				insn_buf[cnt++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, insn->dst_reg,
 								(1ULL << size * 8) - 1);
 			}
 		}
-- 
2.40.1.495.gc816e09b53d-goog