From patchwork Tue Mar 31 08:59:28 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Greg KH X-Patchwork-Id: 228615 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DEAFC2D0EE for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:17:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99662137B for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:17:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1585646249; bh=Tj/iq0FRyUK/KJfzZTg+0+d4QNo001tjbb7+70vHkUY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=vyQ878Pa3d/GVbbEvBGHHb5nuvz+LCEQywTDDctdHsOVPTK/aRhgCyCPBGoEzEbez ZOwTWdGEfgXp1XFJYb61mAOCoccyhi/2NNM7F71fnFqInvPZ7qlA0WchunJ1EIuJDS ycG7JW4HgKKcKwcwQmimmU/7d2wu/VUg/zO+1bH0= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730499AbgCaJR2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 05:17:28 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:38504 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732037AbgCaJRZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 05:17:25 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C006B20675; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:17:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1585646244; bh=Tj/iq0FRyUK/KJfzZTg+0+d4QNo001tjbb7+70vHkUY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lucerV/qlx8Fswy2eQZgRCwCtNKhHu6GdQAIyLBpv7MccpBqS8+jEm7qIAJXlXEJo xWegBju6G6MC7lrQHvq8U+T/ggEaPdTnAKBiEWFhV2gvn2Y1wBUQjs1sgFUfPDNqD9 qPU5pBCWar0GL7A+p/UDbzr5UebBX/YdgSGs+o3I= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Xi Wang , Luke Nelson , Daniel Borkmann Subject: [PATCH 5.4 128/155] bpf, x32: Fix bug with JMP32 JSET BPF_X checking upper bits Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 10:59:28 +0200 Message-Id: <20200331085432.664230082@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.26.0 In-Reply-To: <20200331085418.274292403@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20200331085418.274292403@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.66 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org From: Luke Nelson commit 80f1f85036355e5581ec0b99913410345ad3491b upstream. The current x32 BPF JIT is incorrect for JMP32 JSET BPF_X when the upper 32 bits of operand registers are non-zero in certain situations. The problem is in the following code: case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSET | BPF_X: case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSET | BPF_X: ... /* and dreg_lo,sreg_lo */ EMIT2(0x23, add_2reg(0xC0, sreg_lo, dreg_lo)); /* and dreg_hi,sreg_hi */ EMIT2(0x23, add_2reg(0xC0, sreg_hi, dreg_hi)); /* or dreg_lo,dreg_hi */ EMIT2(0x09, add_2reg(0xC0, dreg_lo, dreg_hi)); This code checks the upper bits of the operand registers regardless if the BPF instruction is BPF_JMP32 or BPF_JMP64. Registers dreg_hi and dreg_lo are not loaded from the stack for BPF_JMP32, however, they can still be polluted with values from previous instructions. The following BPF program demonstrates the bug. The jset64 instruction loads the temporary registers and performs the jump, since ((u64)r7 & (u64)r8) is non-zero. The jset32 should _not_ be taken, as the lower 32 bits are all zero, however, the current JIT will take the branch due the pollution of temporary registers from the earlier jset64. mov64 r0, 0 ld64 r7, 0x8000000000000000 ld64 r8, 0x8000000000000000 jset64 r7, r8, 1 exit jset32 r7, r8, 1 mov64 r0, 2 exit The expected return value of this program is 2; under the buggy x32 JIT it returns 0. The fix is to skip using the upper 32 bits for jset32 and compare the upper 32 bits for jset64 only. All tests in test_bpf.ko and selftests/bpf/test_verifier continue to pass with this change. We found this bug using our automated verification tool, Serval. Fixes: 69f827eb6e14 ("x32: bpf: implement jitting of JMP32") Co-developed-by: Xi Wang Signed-off-by: Xi Wang Signed-off-by: Luke Nelson Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200305234416.31597-1-luke.r.nels@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 10 ++++++---- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c @@ -2039,10 +2039,12 @@ static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_p } /* and dreg_lo,sreg_lo */ EMIT2(0x23, add_2reg(0xC0, sreg_lo, dreg_lo)); - /* and dreg_hi,sreg_hi */ - EMIT2(0x23, add_2reg(0xC0, sreg_hi, dreg_hi)); - /* or dreg_lo,dreg_hi */ - EMIT2(0x09, add_2reg(0xC0, dreg_lo, dreg_hi)); + if (is_jmp64) { + /* and dreg_hi,sreg_hi */ + EMIT2(0x23, add_2reg(0xC0, sreg_hi, dreg_hi)); + /* or dreg_lo,dreg_hi */ + EMIT2(0x09, add_2reg(0xC0, dreg_lo, dreg_hi)); + } goto emit_cond_jmp; } case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSET | BPF_K: