[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0f8ec4c7-5de4-4e0b-a50e-cf4f8d59709b@linux.dev>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 11:34:55 -0800
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
To: Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, horms@...nel.org, jakub@...udflare.com,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf, sockmap: Fix af_unix null-ptr-deref in proto
update
On 2/4/26 7:41 AM, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>>>>>> If the concern is the bpf iterator prog may use a released unix_peer(sk)
>>>>>> pointer, it should be fine. The unix_peer(sk) pointer is not a trusted
>>>>>> pointer to the bpf prog, so nothing bad will happen other than
>>>>>> potentially reading incorrect values.
I misremembered that following unix->peer would be marked as
(PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_UNTRUSTED). I forgot there are some legacy supports
on the PTR_TO_BTF_ID (i.e. without PTR_UNTRUSTED marking).
>>>>>
>>>>> But if the prog passes a released peer pointer to a bpf helper:
>>>>>
>>>>> BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in bpf_skc_to_unix_sock+0x95/0xb0
>>>>> Read of size 1 at addr ffff888110654c92 by task test_progs/1936
>>>
>>> hmm... bpf_skc_to_unix_sock is exposed to tracing. bpf_iter is a tracing
>>> bpf prog.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can you cook a patch for this ? probably like below
>>>
>>> This can help the bpf_iter but not the other tracing prog such as fentry.
>>
>> Oh well ... then bpf_skc_to_unix_sock() can be used even
>> with SEQ_START_TOKEN at fentry of bpf_iter_unix_seq_show() ??
It is fine. The type is void.
>>
>> How about adding notrace to all af_unix bpf iterator functions ?
but right, other functions taking [unix_]sock pointer could be audited.
I don't know af_unix well enough to assess the blast radius or whether
some useful functions may become untraceable.
>>
>> The procfs iterator holds a spinlock of the hashtable from
>> ->start/next() to ->stop() to prevent the race with unix_release_sock().
>>
>> I think other (non-iterator) functions cannot do such racy
>> access with tracing prog.
>
> But then there's SOCK_DGRAM where you can drop unix_peer(sk) without
> releasing sk; see AF_UNSPEC in unix_dgram_connect(). I think Martin is
> right, we can crash at many fentries.
>
> BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in bpf_skc_to_unix_sock+0xa4/0xb0
> Read of size 2 at addr ffff888147d38890 by task test_progs/2495
> Call Trace:
> dump_stack_lvl+0x5d/0x80
> print_report+0x170/0x4f3
> kasan_report+0xe1/0x180
> bpf_skc_to_unix_sock+0xa4/0xb0
> bpf_prog_564a1c39c35d86a2_unix_shutdown_entry+0x8a/0x8e
> bpf_trampoline_6442564662+0x47/0xab
> unix_shutdown+0x9/0x880
> __sys_shutdown+0xe1/0x160
> __x64_sys_shutdown+0x52/0x90
> do_syscall_64+0x6b/0x3a0
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
This probably is the first case where reading a sk pointer requires a
lock. I think it will need to be marked as PTR_UNTRUSTED in the verifier
for the unix->peer access, so that it cannot be passed to a helper.
There is a BTF_TYPE_SAFE_TRUSTED list. afaik, there is no untrusted one now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists