History

bpf: fix integer overflows

There were various issues related to the limited size of integers used in the verifier: - `off + size` overflow in __check_map_access() - `off + reg->off` overflow in check_mem_access() - `off + reg->var_off.value` overflow or 32-bit truncation of `reg->var_off.value` in check_mem_access() - 32-bit truncation in check_stack_boundary() Make sure that any integer math cannot overflow by not allowing pointer math with large values. Also reduce the scope of "scalar op scalar" tracking.

Alexei Starovoitov committed 8 years ago

Commit bb7f0f91 parent 179d1c52 files · +50 −2Browse files

Unified · Split

2 files
  1. include/linux/bpf_verifier.h +2 −2
  2. kernel/bpf/verifier.c +48 −0
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h+2−2
@@ -15,11 +15,11 @@ · 14 unmodified lines
1515 * In practice this is far bigger than any realistic pointer offset; this limit
1616 * ensures that umax_value + (int)off + (int)size cannot overflow a u64.
1717 */
18−#define BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF (1ULL << 31)
18+#define BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF (1 << 29)
1919 /* Maximum variable size permitted for ARG_CONST_SIZE[_OR_ZERO]. This ensures
2020 * that converting umax_value to int cannot overflow.
2121 */
22−#define BPF_MAX_VAR_SIZ INT_MAX
22+#define BPF_MAX_VAR_SIZ (1 << 29)
2323
2424 /* Liveness marks, used for registers and spilled-regs (in stack slots).
2525 * Read marks propagate upwards until they find a write mark; they record that
kernel/bpf/verifier.c+48−0
@@ -1819,6 +1819,41 @@ static bool signed_sub_overflows(s64 a, s64 b) · 1818 unmodified lines
18191819 return res > a;
18201820 }
18211821
1822+static bool check_reg_sane_offset(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
1823+ const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
1824+ enum bpf_reg_type type)
1825+{
1826+ bool known = tnum_is_const(reg->var_off);
1827+ s64 val = reg->var_off.value;
1828+ s64 smin = reg->smin_value;
1829+
1830+ if (known && (val >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || val <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF)) {
1831+ verbose(env, "math between %s pointer and %lld is not allowed\n",
1832+ reg_type_str[type], val);
1833+ return false;
1834+ }
1835+
1836+ if (reg->off >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || reg->off <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF) {
1837+ verbose(env, "%s pointer offset %d is not allowed\n",
1838+ reg_type_str[type], reg->off);
1839+ return false;
1840+ }
1841+
1842+ if (smin == S64_MIN) {
1843+ verbose(env, "math between %s pointer and register with unbounded min value is not allowed\n",
1844+ reg_type_str[type]);
1845+ return false;
1846+ }
1847+
1848+ if (smin >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || smin <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF) {
1849+ verbose(env, "value %lld makes %s pointer be out of bounds\n",
1850+ smin, reg_type_str[type]);
1851+ return false;
1852+ }
1853+
1854+ return true;
1855+}
1856+
18221857 /* Handles arithmetic on a pointer and a scalar: computes new min/max and var_off.
18231858 * Caller should also handle BPF_MOV case separately.
18241859 * If we return -EACCES, caller may want to try again treating pointer as a
@@ -1887,6 +1922,10 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, · 62 unmodified lines
18871922 dst_reg->type = ptr_reg->type;
18881923 dst_reg->id = ptr_reg->id;
18891924
1925+ if (!check_reg_sane_offset(env, off_reg, ptr_reg->type) ||
1926+ !check_reg_sane_offset(env, ptr_reg, ptr_reg->type))
1927+ return -EINVAL;
1928+
18901929 switch (opcode) {
18911930 case BPF_ADD:
18921931 /* We can take a fixed offset as long as it doesn't overflow
@@ -2017,6 +2056,9 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, · 124 unmodified lines
20172056 return -EACCES;
20182057 }
20192058
2059+ if (!check_reg_sane_offset(env, dst_reg, ptr_reg->type))
2060+ return -EINVAL;
2061+
20202062 __update_reg_bounds(dst_reg);
20212063 __reg_deduce_bounds(dst_reg);
20222064 __reg_bound_offset(dst_reg);
@@ -2046,6 +2088,12 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, · 23 unmodified lines
20462088 src_known = tnum_is_const(src_reg.var_off);
20472089 dst_known = tnum_is_const(dst_reg->var_off);
20482090
2091+ if (!src_known &&
2092+ opcode != BPF_ADD && opcode != BPF_SUB && opcode != BPF_AND) {
2093+ __mark_reg_unknown(dst_reg);
2094+ return 0;
2095+ }
2096+
20492097 switch (opcode) {
20502098 case BPF_ADD:
20512099 if (signed_add_overflows(dst_reg->smin_value, smin_val) ||

Keyboard shortcuts

General

Show keyboard shortcuts
?
Focus the current search
/

Issues and pull requests

Open filters
f

Issues, pull requests and Inbox

Select next item
j↓
Select previous item
k↑
Open selected item
Enter
Dismiss filters or clear selection
Esc

Repository code

Go to file
t