linux.git/kernel/bpf, branch v5.4.228

bpf: Ensure correct locking around vulnerable function find_vpid()

2022-10-26T11:22:24+00:00

[ Upstream commit 83c10cc362d91c0d8d25e60779ee52fdbbf3894d ]

The documentation for find_vpid() clearly states:

  "Must be called with the tasklist_lock or rcu_read_lock() held."

Presently we do neither for find_vpid() instance in bpf_task_fd_query().
Add proper rcu_read_lock/unlock() to fix the issue.

Fixes: 41bdc4b40ed6f ("bpf: introduce bpf subcommand BPF_TASK_FD_QUERY")
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Acked-by: Yonghong Song 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220912133855.1218900-1-lee@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: btf: fix truncated last_member_type_id in btf_struct_resolve

2022-10-26T11:22:24+00:00

[ Upstream commit a37a32583e282d8d815e22add29bc1e91e19951a ]

When trying to finish resolving a struct member, btf_struct_resolve
saves the member type id in a u16 temporary variable. This truncates
the 32 bit type id value if it exceeds UINT16_MAX.

As a result, structs that have members with type ids > UINT16_MAX and
which need resolution will fail with a message like this:

    [67414] STRUCT ff_device size=120 vlen=12
        effect_owners type_id=67434 bits_offset=960 Member exceeds struct_size

Fix this by changing the type of last_member_type_id to u32.

Fixes: a0791f0df7d2 ("bpf: fix BTF limits")
Reviewed-by: Stanislav Fomichev 
Signed-off-by: Lorenz Bauer 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220910110120.339242-1-oss@lmb.io
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Verifer, adjust_scalar_min_max_vals to always call update_reg_bounds()

2022-08-11T10:57:51+00:00

commit 294f2fc6da27620a506e6c050241655459ccd6bd upstream.

Currently, for all op verification we call __red_deduce_bounds() and
__red_bound_offset() but we only call __update_reg_bounds() in bitwise
ops. However, we could benefit from calling __update_reg_bounds() in
BPF_ADD, BPF_SUB, and BPF_MUL cases as well.

For example, a register with state 'R1_w=invP0' when we subtract from
it,

 w1 -= 2

Before coerce we will now have an smin_value=S64_MIN, smax_value=U64_MAX
and unsigned bounds umin_value=0, umax_value=U64_MAX. These will then
be clamped to S32_MIN, U32_MAX values by coerce in the case of alu32 op
as done in above example. However tnum will be a constant because the
ALU op is done on a constant.

Without update_reg_bounds() we have a scenario where tnum is a const
but our unsigned bounds do not reflect this. By calling update_reg_bounds
after coerce to 32bit we further refine the umin_value to U64_MAX in the
alu64 case or U32_MAX in the alu32 case above.

Signed-off-by: John Fastabend 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/158507151689.15666.566796274289413203.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Make sure mac_header was set before using it

2022-07-29T15:14:16+00:00

commit 0326195f523a549e0a9d7fd44c70b26fd7265090 upstream.

Classic BPF has a way to load bytes starting from the mac header.

Some skbs do not have a mac header, and skb_mac_header()
in this case is returning a pointer that 65535 bytes after
skb->head.

Existing range check in bpf_internal_load_pointer_neg_helper()
was properly kicking and no illegal access was happening.

New sanity check in skb_mac_header() is firing, so we need
to avoid it.

WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 28990 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2785 skb_mac_header include/linux/skbuff.h:2785 [inline]
WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 28990 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2785 bpf_internal_load_pointer_neg_helper+0x1b1/0x1c0 kernel/bpf/core.c:74
Modules linked in:
CPU: 1 PID: 28990 Comm: syz-executor.0 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc4-syzkaller-00865-g4874fb9484be #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 06/29/2022
RIP: 0010:skb_mac_header include/linux/skbuff.h:2785 [inline]
RIP: 0010:bpf_internal_load_pointer_neg_helper+0x1b1/0x1c0 kernel/bpf/core.c:74
Code: ff ff 45 31 f6 e9 5a ff ff ff e8 aa 27 40 00 e9 3b ff ff ff e8 90 27 40 00 e9 df fe ff ff e8 86 27 40 00 eb 9e e8 2f 2c f3 ff <0f> 0b eb b1 e8 96 27 40 00 e9 79 fe ff ff 90 41 57 41 56 41 55 41
RSP: 0018:ffffc9000309f668 EFLAGS: 00010216
RAX: 0000000000000118 RBX: ffffffffffeff00c RCX: ffffc9000e417000
RDX: 0000000000040000 RSI: ffffffff81873f21 RDI: 0000000000000003
RBP: ffff8880842878c0 R08: 0000000000000003 R09: 000000000000ffff
R10: 000000000000ffff R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000004
R13: ffff88803ac56c00 R14: 000000000000ffff R15: dffffc0000000000
FS: 00007f5c88a16700(0000) GS:ffff8880b9b00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007fdaa9f6c058 CR3: 000000003a82c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:

____bpf_skb_load_helper_32 net/core/filter.c:276 [inline]
bpf_skb_load_helper_32+0x191/0x220 net/core/filter.c:264

Fixes: f9aefd6b2aa3 ("net: warn if mac header was not set")
Reported-by: syzbot 
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220707123900.945305-1-edumazet@google.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix incorrect memory charge cost calculation in stack_map_alloc()

2022-06-22T12:11:02+00:00

commit b45043192b3e481304062938a6561da2ceea46a6 upstream.

This is a backport of the original upstream patch for 5.4/5.10.

The original upstream patch has been applied to 5.4/5.10 branches, which
simply removed the line:

  cost += n_buckets * (value_size + sizeof(struct stack_map_bucket));

This is correct for upstream branch but incorrect for 5.4/5.10 branches,
as the 5.4/5.10 branches do not have the commit 370868107bf6 ("bpf:
Eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for stackmap maps"), so the
bpf_map_charge_init() function has not been removed.

Currently the bpf_map_charge_init() function in 5.4/5.10 branches takes a
wrong memory charge cost, the

  attr->max_entries * (sizeof(struct stack_map_bucket) + (u64)value_size))

part is missing, let's fix it.

Cc:  # 5.4.y
Cc:  # 5.10.y
Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix excessive memory allocation in stack_map_alloc()

2022-06-14T16:11:32+00:00

[ Upstream commit b45043192b3e481304062938a6561da2ceea46a6 ]

The 'n_buckets * (value_size + sizeof(struct stack_map_bucket))' part of the
allocated memory for 'smap' is never used after the memlock accounting was
removed, thus get rid of it.

[ Note, Daniel:

Commit b936ca643ade ("bpf: rework memlock-based memory accounting for maps")
moved `cost += n_buckets * (value_size + sizeof(struct stack_map_bucket))`
up and therefore before the bpf_map_area_alloc() allocation, sigh. In a later
step commit c85d69135a91 ("bpf: move memory size checks to bpf_map_charge_init()"),
and the overflow checks of `cost >= U32_MAX - PAGE_SIZE` moved into
bpf_map_charge_init(). And then 370868107bf6 ("bpf: Eliminate rlimit-based
memory accounting for stackmap maps") finally removed the bpf_map_charge_init().
Anyway, the original code did the allocation same way as /after/ this fix. ]

Fixes: b936ca643ade ("bpf: rework memlock-based memory accounting for maps")
Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220407130423.798386-1-ytcoode@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

bpf: Add kconfig knob for disabling unpriv bpf by default

2022-02-16T11:52:49+00:00

commit 08389d888287c3823f80b0216766b71e17f0aba5 upstream.

Add a kconfig knob which allows for unprivileged bpf to be disabled by default.
If set, the knob sets /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled to value of 2.

This still allows a transition of 2 -> {0,1} through an admin. Similarly,
this also still keeps 1 -> {1} behavior intact, so that once set to permanently
disabled, it cannot be undone aside from a reboot.

We've also added extra2 with max of 2 for the procfs handler, so that an admin
still has a chance to toggle between 0 <-> 2.

Either way, as an additional alternative, applications can make use of CAP_BPF
that we added a while ago.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/74ec548079189e4e4dffaeb42b8987bb3c852eee.1620765074.git.daniel@iogearbox.net
[fllinden@amazon.com: backported to 5.4]
Signed-off-by: Frank van der Linden 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix integer overflow in argument calculation for bpf_map_area_alloc

2021-12-17T09:12:24+00:00

commit 7dd5d437c258bbf4cc15b35229e5208b87b8b4e0 upstream.

In 32-bit architecture, the result of sizeof() is a 32-bit integer so
the expression becomes the multiplication between 2 32-bit integer which
can potentially leads to integer overflow. As a result,
bpf_map_area_alloc() allocates less memory than needed.

Fix this by casting 1 operand to u64.

Fixes: 0d2c4f964050 ("bpf: Eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash maps")
Fixes: 99c51064fb06 ("devmap: Use bpf_map_area_alloc() for allocating hash buckets")
Fixes: 546ac1ffb70d ("bpf: add devmap, a map for storing net device references")
Signed-off-by: Bui Quang Minh 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210613143440.71975-1-minhquangbui99@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Connor O'Brien 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Fix the off-by-two error in range markings

2021-12-14T13:48:59+00:00

commit 2fa7d94afc1afbb4d702760c058dc2d7ed30f226 upstream.

The first commit cited below attempts to fix the off-by-one error that
appeared in some comparisons with an open range. Due to this error,
arithmetically equivalent pieces of code could get different verdicts
from the verifier, for example (pseudocode):

  // 1. Passes the verifier:
  if (data + 8 > data_end)
      return early
  read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]

  // 2. Rejected by the verifier (should still pass):
  if (data + 7 >= data_end)
      return early
  read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]

The attempted fix, however, shifts the range by one in a wrong
direction, so the bug not only remains, but also such piece of code
starts failing in the verifier:

  // 3. Rejected by the verifier, but the check is stricter than in #1.
  if (data + 8 >= data_end)
      return early
  read *(u64 *)data, i.e. [data; data+7]

The change performed by that fix converted an off-by-one bug into
off-by-two. The second commit cited below added the BPF selftests
written to ensure than code chunks like #3 are rejected, however,
they should be accepted.

This commit fixes the off-by-two error by adjusting new_range in the
right direction and fixes the tests by changing the range into the
one that should actually fail.

Fixes: fb2a311a31d3 ("bpf: fix off by one for range markings with L{T, E} patterns")
Fixes: b37242c773b2 ("bpf: add test cases to bpf selftests to cover all access tests")
Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy 
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211130181607.593149-1-maximmi@nvidia.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Prevent increasing bpf_jit_limit above max

2021-11-17T08:48:20+00:00

[ Upstream commit fadb7ff1a6c2c565af56b4aacdd086b067eed440 ]

Restrict bpf_jit_limit to the maximum supported by the arch's JIT.

Signed-off-by: Lorenz Bauer 
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211014142554.53120-4-lmb@cloudflare.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin