[PATCH 5.11 578/601] bpf: Fix propagation of 32 bit unsigned bounds from 64 bit bounds
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Wed May 12 2021 - 13:58:12 EST
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 10bf4e83167cc68595b85fd73bb91e8f2c086e36 ]
Similarly as b02709587ea3 ("bpf: Fix propagation of 32-bit signed bounds
from 64-bit bounds."), we also need to fix the propagation of 32 bit
unsigned bounds from 64 bit counterparts. That is, really only set the
u32_{min,max}_value when /both/ {umin,umax}_value safely fit in 32 bit
space. For example, the register with a umin_value == 1 does /not/ imply
that u32_min_value is also equal to 1, since umax_value could be much
larger than 32 bit subregister can hold, and thus u32_min_value is in
the interval [0,1] instead.
Before fix, invalid tracking result of R2_w=inv1:
[...]
5: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
5: (35) if r2 >= 0x1 goto pc+1
[...] // goto path
7: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,umin_value=1) R10=fp0
7: (b6) if w2 <= 0x1 goto pc+1
[...] // goto path
9: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775807,smax_value=9223372032559808513,umin_value=1,umax_value=18446744069414584321,var_off=(0x1; 0xffffffff00000000),s32_min_value=1,s32_max_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R10=fp0
9: (bc) w2 = w2
10: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv1 R10=fp0
[...]
After fix, correct tracking result of R2_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1)):
[...]
5: R0_w=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0) R10=fp0
5: (35) if r2 >= 0x1 goto pc+1
[...] // goto path
7: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,umin_value=1) R10=fp0
7: (b6) if w2 <= 0x1 goto pc+1
[...] // goto path
9: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,smax_value=9223372032559808513,umax_value=18446744069414584321,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff00000001),s32_min_value=0,s32_max_value=1,u32_max_value=1) R10=fp0
9: (bc) w2 = w2
10: R0=inv1337 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1,var_off=(0x0; 0x1)) R10=fp0
[...]
Thus, same issue as in b02709587ea3 holds for unsigned subregister tracking.
Also, align __reg64_bound_u32() similarly to __reg64_bound_s32() as done in
b02709587ea3 to make them uniform again.
Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Manfred Paul (@_manfp)
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 8 +++-----
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 4e4a844a68c3..3dd297203ab5 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1304,9 +1304,7 @@ static bool __reg64_bound_s32(s64 a)
static bool __reg64_bound_u32(u64 a)
{
- if (a > U32_MIN && a < U32_MAX)
- return true;
- return false;
+ return a > U32_MIN && a < U32_MAX;
}
static void __reg_combine_64_into_32(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
@@ -1317,10 +1315,10 @@ static void __reg_combine_64_into_32(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
reg->s32_min_value = (s32)reg->smin_value;
reg->s32_max_value = (s32)reg->smax_value;
}
- if (__reg64_bound_u32(reg->umin_value))
+ if (__reg64_bound_u32(reg->umin_value) && __reg64_bound_u32(reg->umax_value)) {
reg->u32_min_value = (u32)reg->umin_value;
- if (__reg64_bound_u32(reg->umax_value))
reg->u32_max_value = (u32)reg->umax_value;
+ }
/* Intersecting with the old var_off might have improved our bounds
* slightly. e.g. if umax was 0x7f...f and var_off was (0; 0xf...fc),
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c
index 1b138cd2b187..1b1c798e9248 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c
@@ -186,7 +186,7 @@
},
.fixup_map_hash_48b = { 3 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
- .errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=44 size=8",
+ .errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
--
2.30.2