Skip to content

cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel

openanolis / cloud-kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 160
Star 36
Fork 7
cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel
提交 2d2be8ca 编写于 作者: D Daniel Borkmann 提交者： David S. Miller
浏览文件
操作

bpf: fix range propagation on direct packet access 

LLVM can generate code that tests for direct packet access via
skb->data/data_end in a way that currently gets rejected by the
verifier, example:

  [...]
   7: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80)
   8: (61) r9 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76)
   9: (bf) r2 = r9
  10: (07) r2 += 54
  11: (3d) if r3 >= r2 goto pc+12
   R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx
   R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp
  12: (18) r4 = 0xffffff7a
  14: (05) goto pc+430
  [...]

  from 11 to 24: R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv
                 R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp
  24: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r1
  25: (b7) r1 = 0
  26: (63) *(u32 *)(r6 +56) = r1
  27: (b7) r2 = 40
  28: (71) r8 = *(u8 *)(r9 +20)
  invalid access to packet, off=20 size=1, R9(id=0,off=0,r=0)

The reason why this gets rejected despite a proper test is that we
currently call find_good_pkt_pointers() only in case where we detect
tests like rX > pkt_end, where rX is of type pkt(id=Y,off=Z,r=0) and
derived, for example, from a register of type pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=0)
pointing to skb->data. find_good_pkt_pointers() then fills the range
in the current branch to pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=Z) on success.

For above case, we need to extend that to recognize pkt_end >= rX
pattern and mark the other branch that is taken on success with the
appropriate pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=Z) type via find_good_pkt_pointers().
Since eBPF operates on BPF_JGT (>) and BPF_JGE (>=), these are the
only two practical options to test for from what LLVM could have
generated, since there's no such thing as BPF_JLT (<) or BPF_JLE (<=)
that we would need to take into account as well.

After the fix:

  [...]
   7: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80)
   8: (61) r9 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76)
   9: (bf) r2 = r9
  10: (07) r2 += 54
  11: (3d) if r3 >= r2 goto pc+12
   R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx
   R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp
  12: (18) r4 = 0xffffff7a
  14: (05) goto pc+430
  [...]

  from 11 to 24: R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=54) R3=pkt_end R4=inv
                 R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=54) R10=fp
  24: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r1
  25: (b7) r1 = 0
  26: (63) *(u32 *)(r6 +56) = r1
  27: (b7) r2 = 40
  28: (71) r8 = *(u8 *)(r9 +20)
  29: (bf) r1 = r8
  30: (25) if r8 > 0x3c goto pc+47
   R1=inv56 R2=imm40 R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R8=inv56
   R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=54) R10=fp
  31: (b7) r1 = 1
  [...]

Verifier test cases are also added in this work, one that demonstrates
the mentioned example here and one that tries a bad packet access for
the current/fall-through branch (the one with types pkt(id=X,off=Y,r=0),
pkt(id=X,off=0,r=0)), then a case with good and bad accesses, and two
with both test variants (>, >=).

Fixes: 969bf05e ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
上级 9f5afeae
隐藏空白更改
内联 并排
Showing with 142 addition and 15 deletion
kernel/bpf/verifier.c
浏览文件 @ 2d2be8ca
......@@ -1637,21 +1637,42 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
return 0;
}
static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct verifier_env *env,
struct reg_state *dst_reg)
static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct verifier_state *state,
const struct reg_state *dst_reg)
{
struct verifier_state *state = &env->cur_state;
struct reg_state *regs = state->regs, *reg;
int i;
/* r2 = r3;
* r2 += 8
* if (r2 > pkt_end) goto somewhere
* r2 == dst_reg, pkt_end == src_reg,
* r2=pkt(id=n,off=8,r=0)
* r3=pkt(id=n,off=0,r=0)
* find register r3 and mark its range as r3=pkt(id=n,off=0,r=8)
* so that range of bytes [r3, r3 + 8) is safe to access
/* LLVM can generate two kind of checks:
*
* Type 1:
*
* r2 = r3;
* r2 += 8;
* if (r2 > pkt_end) goto <handle exception>
* <access okay>
*
* Where:
* r2 == dst_reg, pkt_end == src_reg
* r2=pkt(id=n,off=8,r=0)
* r3=pkt(id=n,off=0,r=0)
*
* Type 2:
*
* r2 = r3;
* r2 += 8;
* if (pkt_end >= r2) goto <access okay>
* <handle exception>
*
* Where:
* pkt_end == dst_reg, r2 == src_reg
* r2=pkt(id=n,off=8,r=0)
* r3=pkt(id=n,off=0,r=0)
*
* Find register r3 and mark its range as r3=pkt(id=n,off=0,r=8)
* so that range of bytes [r3, r3 + 8) is safe to access.
*/
for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++)
if (regs[i].type == PTR_TO_PACKET && regs[i].id == dst_reg->id)
regs[i].range = dst_reg->off;
......@@ -1668,8 +1689,8 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct verifier_env *env,
static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_insn *insn, int *insn_idx)
{
struct reg_state *regs = env->cur_state.regs, *dst_reg;
struct verifier_state *other_branch;
struct verifier_state *other_branch, *this_branch = &env->cur_state;
struct reg_state *regs = this_branch->regs, *dst_reg;
u8 opcode = BPF_OP(insn->code);
int err;
......@@ -1750,13 +1771,17 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct verifier_env *env,
} else if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X && opcode == BPF_JGT &&
dst_reg->type == PTR_TO_PACKET &&
regs[insn->src_reg].type == PTR_TO_PACKET_END) {
find_good_pkt_pointers(env, dst_reg);
find_good_pkt_pointers(this_branch, dst_reg);
} else if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X && opcode == BPF_JGE &&
dst_reg->type == PTR_TO_PACKET_END &&
regs[insn->src_reg].type == PTR_TO_PACKET) {
find_good_pkt_pointers(other_branch, &regs[insn->src_reg]);
} else if (is_pointer_value(env, insn->dst_reg)) {
verbose("R%d pointer comparison prohibited\n", insn->dst_reg);
return -EACCES;
}
if (log_level)
print_verifier_state(&env->cur_state);
print_verifier_state(this_branch);
return 0;
}
......
samples/bpf/test_verifier.c
浏览文件 @ 2d2be8ca
......@@ -1528,6 +1528,108 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test5 (pkt_end >= reg, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test6 (pkt_end >= reg, bad access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test7 (pkt_end >= reg, both accesses)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test8 (double test, variant 1)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 4),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test9 (double test, variant 2)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test1, valid packet_ptr range",
.insns = {
......
Markdown is supported
0% 或 .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑！
想要评论请 注册 或