All the mail mirrored from lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kurt Manucredo <fuzzybritches0@gmail.com>
To: ebiggers@kernel.org,
	syzbot+bed360704c521841c85d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Cc: Kurt Manucredo <fuzzybritches0@gmail.com>,
	keescook@chromium.org, yhs@fb.com, dvyukov@google.com,
	andrii@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, davem@davemloft.net, hawk@kernel.org,
	john.fastabend@gmail.com, kafai@fb.com, kpsingh@kernel.org,
	kuba@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, songliubraving@fb.com,
	syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, nathan@kernel.org,
	ndesaulniers@google.com, clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: [PATCH v5] bpf: core: fix shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 16:42:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <85536-177443-curtm@phaethon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YMJvbGEz0xu9JU9D@gmail.com>

Syzbot detects a shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run()
kernel/bpf/core.c:1414:2.

The shift-out-of-bounds happens when we have BPF_X. This means we have
to go the same way we go when we want to avoid a divide-by-zero. We do
it in do_misc_fixups().

When we have BPF_K we find divide-by-zero and shift-out-of-bounds guards
next each other in check_alu_op(). It seems only logical to me that the
same should be true for BPF_X in do_misc_fixups() since it is there where
I found the divide-by-zero guard. Or is there a reason I'm not aware of,
that dictates that the checks should be in adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(),
as they are now?

This patch was tested by syzbot.

Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+bed360704c521841c85d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Kurt Manucredo <fuzzybritches0@gmail.com>
---

https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=edb51be4c9a320186328893287bb30d5eed09231

Changelog:
----------
v5 - Fix shift-out-of-bounds in do_misc_fixups().
v4 - Fix shift-out-of-bounds in adjust_scalar_min_max_vals.
     Fix commit message.
v3 - Make it clearer what the fix is for.
v2 - Fix shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run() by adding boundary
     check in check_alu_op() in verifier.c.
v1 - Fix shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run() by adding boundary
     check in ___bpf_prog_run().

thanks

kind regards

Kurt

 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 94ba5163d4c5..83c7c1ccaf26 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7496,7 +7496,6 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	u64 umin_val, umax_val;
 	s32 s32_min_val, s32_max_val;
 	u32 u32_min_val, u32_max_val;
-	u64 insn_bitness = (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64) ? 64 : 32;
 	bool alu32 = (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) != BPF_ALU64);
 	int ret;
 
@@ -7592,39 +7591,18 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		scalar_min_max_xor(dst_reg, &src_reg);
 		break;
 	case BPF_LSH:
-		if (umax_val >= insn_bitness) {
-			/* Shifts greater than 31 or 63 are undefined.
-			 * This includes shifts by a negative number.
-			 */
-			mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
-			break;
-		}
 		if (alu32)
 			scalar32_min_max_lsh(dst_reg, &src_reg);
 		else
 			scalar_min_max_lsh(dst_reg, &src_reg);
 		break;
 	case BPF_RSH:
-		if (umax_val >= insn_bitness) {
-			/* Shifts greater than 31 or 63 are undefined.
-			 * This includes shifts by a negative number.
-			 */
-			mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
-			break;
-		}
 		if (alu32)
 			scalar32_min_max_rsh(dst_reg, &src_reg);
 		else
 			scalar_min_max_rsh(dst_reg, &src_reg);
 		break;
 	case BPF_ARSH:
-		if (umax_val >= insn_bitness) {
-			/* Shifts greater than 31 or 63 are undefined.
-			 * This includes shifts by a negative number.
-			 */
-			mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
-			break;
-		}
 		if (alu32)
 			scalar32_min_max_arsh(dst_reg, &src_reg);
 		else
@@ -12353,6 +12331,37 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 			continue;
 		}
 
+		/* Make shift-out-of-bounds exceptions impossible. */
+		if (insn->code == (BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_X) ||
+		    insn->code == (BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_X) ||
+		    insn->code == (BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X) ||
+		    insn->code == (BPF_ALU | BPF_LSH | BPF_X) ||
+		    insn->code == (BPF_ALU | BPF_RSH | BPF_X) ||
+		    insn->code == (BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X)) {
+			bool is64 = BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64;
+			u8 insn_bitness = is64 ? 64 : 32;
+			struct bpf_insn chk_and_shift[] = {
+				/* [R,W]x shift >= 32||64 -> 0 */
+				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
+					     BPF_JLT | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
+					     insn_bitness, 2, 0),
+				BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_XOR, insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg),
+				BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
+				*insn,
+			};
+
+			cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_shift);
+
+			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, chk_and_shift, cnt);
+			if (!new_prog)
+				return -ENOMEM;
+
+			delta    += cnt - 1;
+			env->prog = prog = new_prog;
+			insn      = new_prog->insnsi + i + delta;
+			continue;
+		}
+
 		/* Implement LD_ABS and LD_IND with a rewrite, if supported by the program type. */
 		if (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_LD &&
 		    (BPF_MODE(insn->code) == BPF_ABS ||
-- 
2.30.2


  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-15 16:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-10 16:05 [syzbot] UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run syzbot
2021-03-28  3:38 ` syzbot
2021-06-02 21:27   ` [PATCH v3] bpf: core: fix " Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-02 21:27     ` Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-03  4:43     ` Greg KH
2021-06-03  4:43       ` Greg KH
2021-06-05 15:01       ` [PATCH v4] " Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-05 15:01         ` Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-05 17:55         ` Yonghong Song via Linux-kernel-mentees
2021-06-05 17:55           ` Yonghong Song
2021-06-05 19:10           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-05 19:10             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-05 21:39             ` Yonghong Song via Linux-kernel-mentees
2021-06-05 21:39               ` Yonghong Song
2021-06-06 19:44               ` Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-06 19:44                 ` Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-07  7:38             ` Dmitry Vyukov via Linux-kernel-mentees
2021-06-07  7:38               ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-06-09 18:20               ` Kees Cook
2021-06-09 18:20                 ` Kees Cook
2021-06-09 23:40                 ` Yonghong Song
2021-06-09 23:40                   ` Yonghong Song via Linux-kernel-mentees
2021-06-10  5:32                   ` Dmitry Vyukov via Linux-kernel-mentees
2021-06-10  5:32                     ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-06-10  6:06                     ` Yonghong Song via Linux-kernel-mentees
2021-06-10  6:06                       ` Yonghong Song
2021-06-10 17:06                       ` Kees Cook
2021-06-10 17:06                         ` Kees Cook
2021-06-10 17:52                         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-10 17:52                           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-10 20:00                           ` Eric Biggers
2021-06-10 20:00                             ` Eric Biggers
2021-06-15 16:42                             ` Kurt Manucredo [this message]
2021-06-15 18:51                               ` [PATCH v5] " Edward Cree
2021-06-15 19:33                                 ` Eric Biggers
2021-06-15 21:08                                   ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-15 21:32                                     ` Eric Biggers
2021-06-15 21:38                                       ` Eric Biggers
2021-06-15 21:54                                         ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-15 22:07                                           ` Eric Biggers
2021-06-15 22:31                                             ` Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-17 10:09                                             ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-06 19:15           ` [PATCH v4] " Kurt Manucredo
2021-06-06 19:15             ` Kurt Manucredo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=85536-177443-curtm@phaethon \
    --to=fuzzybritches0@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=syzbot+bed360704c521841c85d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.