[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202106101002.DF8C7EF@keescook>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:06:42 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Kurt Manucredo <fuzzybritches0@...il.com>,
syzbot+bed360704c521841c85d@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>, nathan@...nel.org,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Clang-Built-Linux ML <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] bpf: core: fix shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run
On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 11:06:31PM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
>
> On 6/9/21 10:32 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 1:40 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
> > > On 6/9/21 11:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 09:38:43AM +0200, 'Dmitry Vyukov' via Clang Built Linux wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 9:10 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > > > > <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 10:55 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On 6/5/21 8:01 AM, Kurt Manucredo wrote:
> > > > > > > > Syzbot detects a shift-out-of-bounds in ___bpf_prog_run()
> > > > > > > > kernel/bpf/core.c:1414:2.
> > > > > > > [...]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think this is what happens. For the above case, we simply
> > > > > > > marks the dst reg as unknown and didn't fail verification.
> > > > > > > So later on at runtime, the shift optimization will have wrong
> > > > > > > shift value (> 31/64). Please correct me if this is not right
> > > > > > > analysis. As I mentioned in the early please write detailed
> > > > > > > analysis in commit log.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The large shift is not wrong. It's just undefined.
> > > > > > syzbot has to ignore such cases.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Alexei,
> > > > >
> > > > > The report is produced by KUBSAN. I thought there was an agreement on
> > > > > cleaning up KUBSAN reports from the kernel (the subset enabled on
> > > > > syzbot at least).
> > > > > What exactly cases should KUBSAN ignore?
> > > > > +linux-hardening/kasan-dev for KUBSAN false positive
> > > >
> > > > Can check_shl_overflow() be used at all? Best to just make things
> > > > readable and compiler-happy, whatever the implementation. :)
> > >
> > > This is not a compile issue. If the shift amount is a constant,
> > > compiler should have warned and user should fix the warning.
> > >
> > > This is because user code has
> > > something like
> > > a << s;
> > > where s is a unknown variable and
> > > verifier just marked the result of a << s as unknown value.
> > > Verifier may not reject the code depending on how a << s result
> > > is used.
Ah, gotcha: it's the BPF code itself that needs to catch it.
> > > If bpf program writer uses check_shl_overflow() or some kind
> > > of checking for shift value and won't do shifting if the
> > > shifting may cause an undefined result, there should not
> > > be any kubsan warning.
Right.
> > I guess the main question: what should happen if a bpf program writer
> > does _not_ use compiler nor check_shl_overflow()?
I think the BPF runtime needs to make such actions defined, instead of
doing a blind shift. It needs to check the size of the shift explicitly
when handling the shift instruction.
> If kubsan is not enabled, everything should work as expected even with
> shl overflow may cause undefined result.
>
> if kubsan is enabled, the reported shift-out-of-bounds warning
> should be ignored. You could disasm the insn to ensure that
> there indeed exists a potential shl overflow.
Sure, but the point of UBSAN is to find and alert about undefined
behavior, so we still need to fix this.
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
