From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>,
Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>,
Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
WANG Xuerui <kernel@xen0n.name>,
Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>,
Paul Burton <paulburton@kernel.org>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-hardening @ vger . kernel . org"
<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next RESEND v2 1/2] bpf: Take return from set_memory_ro() into account with bpf_prog_lock_ro()
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 18:30:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <093da237-50c1-5898-1637-7a9a84e1076c@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8f3b3823cce2177e5912ff5f2f11381a16db07db.1709279661.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
On 3/1/24 8:57 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> set_memory_ro() can fail, leaving memory unprotected.
>
> Check its return and take it into account as an error.
>
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/7
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> Cc: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org <linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> ---
> Sorry for the resend, I forgot to flag patch 2 as bpf-next
>
> Note: next patch is autonomous, it is sent as a follow-up of this one to minimize risk of conflict on filter.h because the two changes are too close to each other.
>
> v2: No modification (Just added link in patch message), patchwork discarded this series due to failed test of s390 but it seems unrelated, see https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/wvd5gzde5ejc2rzsbrtwqyof56uw5ea3rxntfrxtkdabzcuwt6@w7iczzhmay2i/T/#m2e61446f42d5dc3d78f2e0e8b7a783f15cfb109d
> ---
> include/linux/filter.h | 5 +++--
> kernel/bpf/core.c | 4 +++-
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 4 +++-
> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h
> index 36cc29a2934c..7dd59bccaeec 100644
> --- a/include/linux/filter.h
> +++ b/include/linux/filter.h
> @@ -884,14 +884,15 @@ bpf_ctx_narrow_access_offset(u32 off, u32 size, u32 size_default)
>
> #define bpf_classic_proglen(fprog) (fprog->len * sizeof(fprog->filter[0]))
>
> -static inline void bpf_prog_lock_ro(struct bpf_prog *fp)
> +static inline int __must_check bpf_prog_lock_ro(struct bpf_prog *fp)
> {
> #ifndef CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON
> if (!fp->jited) {
> set_vm_flush_reset_perms(fp);
> - set_memory_ro((unsigned long)fp, fp->pages);
> + return set_memory_ro((unsigned long)fp, fp->pages);
> }
> #endif
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static inline void bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro(struct bpf_binary_header *hdr)
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> index 71c459a51d9e..c49619ef55d0 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> @@ -2392,7 +2392,9 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog_select_runtime(struct bpf_prog *fp, int *err)
> }
>
> finalize:
> - bpf_prog_lock_ro(fp);
> + *err = bpf_prog_lock_ro(fp);
> + if (*err)
> + return fp;
>
> /* The tail call compatibility check can only be done at
> * this late stage as we need to determine, if we deal
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 1c34b91b9583..6ec134f76a11 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -19096,7 +19096,9 @@ static int jit_subprogs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> * bpf_prog_load will add the kallsyms for the main program.
> */
> for (i = 1; i < env->subprog_cnt; i++) {
> - bpf_prog_lock_ro(func[i]);
> + err = bpf_prog_lock_ro(func[i]);
> + if (err)
> + goto out_free;
How does the error path take out the subprogs from kallsyms in your case? Suppose some of
the loop iterations succeed before we hit an error. I believe the subprogs still exist in
kallsyms here.
> bpf_prog_kallsyms_add(func[i]);
> }
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-07 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-01 7:57 [PATCH bpf-next RESEND v2 1/2] bpf: Take return from set_memory_ro() into account with bpf_prog_lock_ro() Christophe Leroy
2024-03-01 7:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next RESEND v2 2/2] bpf: Take return from set_memory_rox() into account with bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro() Christophe Leroy
2024-03-01 11:27 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-03-07 17:30 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
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=093da237-50c1-5898-1637-7a9a84e1076c@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hengqi.chen@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel@xen0n.name \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulburton@kernel.org \
--cc=puranjay12@gmail.com \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
--cc=udknight@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).