From patchwork Wed May 12 14:51:12 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Greg KH X-Patchwork-Id: 438130 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=-19.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, 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 88D7DC468C0 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 16:31:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65D8861288 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 16:31:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234329AbhELQcE (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 12:32:04 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42878 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241107AbhELQ0Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 12:26:24 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6CEE9619C0; Wed, 12 May 2021 15:49:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1620834580; bh=VxTIwMKdw+AlhXOhpu9FRK7wdMH0cIYyWdLQmL3R/Vg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ArBTSjEJdQZgkhXCtgpR0yCwPaqPtB/OqEsthBv78af9YA3BzRJUuU+1YBBJA4+h8 XOQlyx+vGI5+KWTj+57nN5UTErmmtv+Ft0Gwvlzl6oyqys9sutwjOpSbRxjUO4owBE LmjcPYxwqlXqmQnFx+uW1DxMXSaD38tkUgM5KJXc= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo , Daniel Borkmann , John Fastabend , Alexei Starovoitov Subject: [PATCH 5.11 595/601] bpf: Fix alu32 const subreg bound tracking on bitwise operations Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 16:51:12 +0200 Message-Id: <20210512144847.449458481@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.31.1 In-Reply-To: <20210512144827.811958675@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20210512144827.811958675@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.66 MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org From: Daniel Borkmann commit 049c4e13714ecbca567b4d5f6d563f05d431c80e upstream. Fix a bug in the verifier's scalar32_min_max_*() functions which leads to incorrect tracking of 32 bit bounds for the simulation of and/or/xor bitops. When both the src & dst subreg is a known constant, then the assumption is that scalar_min_max_*() will take care to update bounds correctly. However, this is not the case, for example, consider a register R2 which has a tnum of 0xffffffff00000000, meaning, lower 32 bits are known constant and in this case of value 0x00000001. R2 is then and'ed with a register R3 which is a 64 bit known constant, here, 0x100000002. What can be seen in line '10:' is that 32 bit bounds reach an invalid state where {u,s}32_min_value > {u,s}32_max_value. The reason is scalar32_min_max_*() delegates 32 bit bounds updates to scalar_min_max_*(), however, that really only takes place when both the 64 bit src & dst register is a known constant. Given scalar32_min_max_*() is intended to be designed as closely as possible to scalar_min_max_*(), update the 32 bit bounds in this situation through __mark_reg32_known() which will set all {u,s}32_{min,max}_value to the correct constant, which is 0x00000000 after the fix (given 0x00000001 & 0x00000002 in 32 bit space). This is possible given var32_off already holds the final value as dst_reg->var_off is updated before calling scalar32_min_max_*(). Before fix, invalid tracking of R2: [...] 9: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775807 (0x8000000000000001),smax_value=9223372032559808513 (0x7fffffff00000001),umin_value=1,umax_value=0xffffffff00000001,var_off=(0x1; 0xffffffff00000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=1,u32_min_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0 9: (5f) r2 &= r3 10: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967296 (0x100000000),umin_value=0,umax_value=0x100000000,var_off=(0x0; 0x100000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=0,u32_min_value=1,u32_max_value=0) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0 [...] After fix, correct tracking of R2: [...] 9: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775807 (0x8000000000000001),smax_value=9223372032559808513 (0x7fffffff00000001),umin_value=1,umax_value=0xffffffff00000001,var_off=(0x1; 0xffffffff00000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=1,u32_min_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0 9: (5f) r2 &= r3 10: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967296 (0x100000000),umin_value=0,umax_value=0x100000000,var_off=(0x0; 0x100000000),s32_min_value=0,s32_max_value=0,u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=0) R3_w=inv4294967298 R10=fp0 [...] Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking") Fixes: 2921c90d4718 ("bpf: Fix a verifier failure with xor") Reported-by: Manfred Paul (@_manfp) Reported-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: John Fastabend Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 22 +++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -6396,11 +6396,10 @@ static void scalar32_min_max_and(struct s32 smin_val = src_reg->s32_min_value; u32 umax_val = src_reg->u32_max_value; - /* Assuming scalar64_min_max_and will be called so its safe - * to skip updating register for known 32-bit case. - */ - if (src_known && dst_known) + if (src_known && dst_known) { + __mark_reg32_known(dst_reg, var32_off.value); return; + } /* We get our minimum from the var_off, since that's inherently * bitwise. Our maximum is the minimum of the operands' maxima. @@ -6420,7 +6419,6 @@ static void scalar32_min_max_and(struct dst_reg->s32_min_value = dst_reg->u32_min_value; dst_reg->s32_max_value = dst_reg->u32_max_value; } - } static void scalar_min_max_and(struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg, @@ -6467,11 +6465,10 @@ static void scalar32_min_max_or(struct b s32 smin_val = src_reg->s32_min_value; u32 umin_val = src_reg->u32_min_value; - /* Assuming scalar64_min_max_or will be called so it is safe - * to skip updating register for known case. - */ - if (src_known && dst_known) + if (src_known && dst_known) { + __mark_reg32_known(dst_reg, var32_off.value); return; + } /* We get our maximum from the var_off, and our minimum is the * maximum of the operands' minima @@ -6536,11 +6533,10 @@ static void scalar32_min_max_xor(struct struct tnum var32_off = tnum_subreg(dst_reg->var_off); s32 smin_val = src_reg->s32_min_value; - /* Assuming scalar64_min_max_xor will be called so it is safe - * to skip updating register for known case. - */ - if (src_known && dst_known) + if (src_known && dst_known) { + __mark_reg32_known(dst_reg, var32_off.value); return; + } /* We get both minimum and maximum from the var32_off. */ dst_reg->u32_min_value = var32_off.value;