| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
1.
first bug is a silly mistake. It broke tracing examples and prevented
simple bpf programs from loading.
In the following code:
if (insn->imm == 0 && BPF_SIZE(insn->code) == BPF_W) {
} else if (...) {
// this part should have been executed when
// insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0
}
Obviously it's not doing that. So simple instructions like:
r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
will be rejected. Note the comments in the code around these branches
were and still valid and indicate the true intent.
Replace it with:
if (BPF_SIZE(insn->code) != BPF_W)
continue;
if (insn->imm == 0) {
} else if (...) {
// now this code will be executed when
// insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0
}
2.
second bug is more subtle.
If malicious code is using the same dest register as source register,
the checks designed to prevent the same instruction to be used with different
pointer types will fail to trigger, since we were assigning src_reg_type
when it was already overwritten by check_mem_access().
The fix is trivial. Just move line:
src_reg_type = regs[insn->src_reg].type;
before check_mem_access().
Add new 'access skb fields bad4' test to check this case.
Fixes: 9bac3d6d548e ("bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Due to missing bounds check the DAG pass of the BPF verifier can corrupt
the memory which can cause random crashes during program loading:
[8.449451] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffffffffffffff
[8.451293] IP: [<ffffffff811de33d>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x8d/0x2f0
[8.452329] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
[8.452329] Call Trace:
[8.452329] [<ffffffff8116cc82>] bpf_check+0x852/0x2000
[8.452329] [<ffffffff8116b7e4>] bpf_prog_load+0x1e4/0x310
[8.452329] [<ffffffff811b190f>] ? might_fault+0x5f/0xb0
[8.452329] [<ffffffff8116c206>] SyS_bpf+0x806/0xa30
Fixes: f1bca824dabb ("bpf: add search pruning optimization to verifier")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
existing TC action 'pedit' can munge any bits of the packet.
Generalize it for use in bpf programs attached as cls_bpf and act_bpf via
bpf_skb_store_bytes() helper function.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In order to prepare eBPF support for tc action, we need to add
sched_act_type, so that the eBPF verifier is aware of what helper
function act_bpf may use, that it can load skb data and read out
currently available skb fields.
This is bascially analogous to 96be4325f443 ("ebpf: add sched_cls_type
and map it to sk_filter's verifier ops").
BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS and BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_ACT need to be
separate since both will have a different set of functionality in
future (classifier vs action), thus we won't run into ABI troubles
when the point in time comes to diverge functionality from the
classifier.
The future plan for act_bpf would be that it will be able to write
into skb->data and alter selected fields mirrored in struct __sk_buff.
For an initial support, it's sufficient to map it to sk_filter_ops.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
introduce user accessible mirror of in-kernel 'struct sk_buff':
struct __sk_buff {
__u32 len;
__u32 pkt_type;
__u32 mark;
__u32 queue_mapping;
};
bpf programs can do:
int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb)
{
__u32 var = skb->pkt_type;
which will be compiled to bpf assembler as:
dst_reg = *(u32 *)(src_reg + 4) // 4 == offsetof(struct __sk_buff, pkt_type)
bpf verifier will check validity of access and will convert it to:
dst_reg = *(u8 *)(src_reg + offsetof(struct sk_buff, __pkt_type_offset))
dst_reg &= 7
since skb->pkt_type is a bitfield.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I noticed that a helper function with argument type ARG_ANYTHING does
not need to have an initialized value (register).
This can worst case lead to unintented stack memory leakage in future
helper functions if they are not carefully designed, or unintended
application behaviour in case the application developer was not careful
enough to match a correct helper function signature in the API.
The underlying issue is that ARG_ANYTHING should actually be split
into two different semantics:
1) ARG_DONTCARE for function arguments that the helper function
does not care about (in other words: the default for unused
function arguments), and
2) ARG_ANYTHING that is an argument actually being used by a
helper function and *guaranteed* to be an initialized register.
The current risk is low: ARG_ANYTHING is only used for the 'flags'
argument (r4) in bpf_map_update_elem() that internally does strict
checking.
Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
is_gpl_compatible and prog_type should be moved directly into bpf_prog
as they stay immutable during bpf_prog's lifetime, are core attributes
and they can be locked as read-only later on via bpf_prog_select_runtime().
With a bit of rearranging, this also allows us to shrink bpf_prog_aux
to exactly 1 cacheline.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As discussed recently and at netconf/netdev01, we want to prevent making
bpf_verifier_ops registration available for modules, but have them at a
controlled place inside the kernel instead.
The reason for this is, that out-of-tree modules can go crazy and define
and register any verfifier ops they want, doing all sorts of crap, even
bypassing available GPLed eBPF helper functions. We don't want to offer
such a shiny playground, of course, but keep strict control to ourselves
inside the core kernel.
This also encourages us to design eBPF user helpers carefully and
generically, so they can be shared among various subsystems using eBPF.
For the eBPF traffic classifier (cls_bpf), it's a good start to share
the same helper facilities as we currently do in eBPF for socket filters.
That way, we have BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS look like it's own type, thus
one day if there's a good reason to diverge the set of helper functions
from the set available to socket filters, we keep ABI compatibility.
In future, we could place all bpf_prog_type_list at a central place,
perhaps.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
introduce program type BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER that is used
for attaching programs to sockets where ctx == skb.
add verifier checks for ABS/IND instructions which can only be seen
in socket filters, therefore the check:
if (env->prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER)
verbose("BPF_LD_ABS|IND instructions are only allowed in socket filters\n");
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
verifier keeps track of register state spilled to stack.
registers are 8-byte wide and always aligned, so instead of tracking them
in every byte-sized stack slot, use MAX_BPF_STACK / 8 array to track
spilled register state.
Though verifier runs in user context and its state freed immediately
after verification, it makes sense to reduce its memory usage.
This optimization reduces sizeof(struct verifier_state)
from 12464 to 1712 on 64-bit and from 6232 to 1112 on 32-bit.
Note, this patch doesn't change existing limits, which are there to bound
time and memory during verification: 4k total number of insns in a program,
1k number of jumps (states to visit) and 32k number of processed insn
(since an insn may be visited multiple times). Theoretical worst case memory
during verification is 1712 * 1k = 17Mbyte. Out-of-memory situation triggers
cleanup and rejects the program.
Suggested-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
while comparing for verifier state equivalency the comparison
was missing a check for uninitialized register.
Make sure it does so and add a testcase.
Fixes: f1bca824dabb ("bpf: add search pruning optimization to verifier")
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
consider C program represented in eBPF:
int filter(int arg)
{
int a, b, c, *ptr;
if (arg == 1)
ptr = &a;
else if (arg == 2)
ptr = &b;
else
ptr = &c;
*ptr = 0;
return 0;
}
eBPF verifier has to follow all possible paths through the program
to recognize that '*ptr = 0' instruction would be safe to execute
in all situations.
It's doing it by picking a path towards the end and observes changes
to registers and stack at every insn until it reaches bpf_exit.
Then it comes back to one of the previous branches and goes towards
the end again with potentially different values in registers.
When program has a lot of branches, the number of possible combinations
of branches is huge, so verifer has a hard limit of walking no more
than 32k instructions. This limit can be reached and complex (but valid)
programs could be rejected. Therefore it's important to recognize equivalent
verifier states to prune this depth first search.
Basic idea can be illustrated by the program (where .. are some eBPF insns):
1: ..
2: if (rX == rY) goto 4
3: ..
4: ..
5: ..
6: bpf_exit
In the first pass towards bpf_exit the verifier will walk insns: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Since insn#2 is a branch the verifier will remember its state in verifier stack
to come back to it later.
Since insn#4 is marked as 'branch target', the verifier will remember its state
in explored_states[4] linked list.
Once it reaches insn#6 successfully it will pop the state recorded at insn#2 and
will continue.
Without search pruning optimization verifier would have to walk 4, 5, 6 again,
effectively simulating execution of insns 1, 2, 4, 5, 6
With search pruning it will check whether state at #4 after jumping from #2
is equivalent to one recorded in explored_states[4] during first pass.
If there is an equivalent state, verifier can prune the search at #4 and declare
this path to be safe as well.
In other words two states at #4 are equivalent if execution of 1, 2, 3, 4 insns
and 1, 2, 4 insns produces equivalent registers and stack.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This patch adds verifier core which simulates execution of every insn and
records the state of registers and program stack. Every branch instruction seen
during simulation is pushed into state stack. When verifier reaches BPF_EXIT,
it pops the state from the stack and continues until it reaches BPF_EXIT again.
For program:
1: bpf_mov r1, xxx
2: if (r1 == 0) goto 5
3: bpf_mov r0, 1
4: goto 6
5: bpf_mov r0, 2
6: bpf_exit
The verifier will walk insns: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6
then it will pop the state recorded at insn#2 and will continue: 5, 6
This way it walks all possible paths through the program and checks all
possible values of registers. While doing so, it checks for:
- invalid instructions
- uninitialized register access
- uninitialized stack access
- misaligned stack access
- out of range stack access
- invalid calling convention
- instruction encoding is not using reserved fields
Kernel subsystem configures the verifier with two callbacks:
- bool (*is_valid_access)(int off, int size, enum bpf_access_type type);
that provides information to the verifer which fields of 'ctx'
are accessible (remember 'ctx' is the first argument to eBPF program)
- const struct bpf_func_proto *(*get_func_proto)(enum bpf_func_id func_id);
returns argument constraints of kernel helper functions that eBPF program
may call, so that verifier can checks that R1-R5 types match the prototype
More details in Documentation/networking/filter.txt and in kernel/bpf/verifier.c
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
check that control flow graph of eBPF program is a directed acyclic graph
check_cfg() does:
- detect loops
- detect unreachable instructions
- check that program terminates with BPF_EXIT insn
- check that all branches are within program boundary
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
eBPF programs passed from userspace are using pseudo BPF_LD_IMM64 instructions
to refer to process-local map_fd. Scan the program for such instructions and
if FDs are valid, convert them to 'struct bpf_map' pointers which will be used
by verifier to check access to maps in bpf_map_lookup/update() calls.
If program passes verifier, convert pseudo BPF_LD_IMM64 into generic by dropping
BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD flag.
Note that eBPF interpreter is generic and knows nothing about pseudo insns.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
add optional attributes for BPF_PROG_LOAD syscall:
union bpf_attr {
struct {
...
__u32 log_level; /* verbosity level of eBPF verifier */
__u32 log_size; /* size of user buffer */
__aligned_u64 log_buf; /* user supplied 'char *buffer' */
};
};
when log_level > 0 the verifier will return its verification log in the user
supplied buffer 'log_buf' which can be used by program author to analyze why
verifier rejected given program.
'Understanding eBPF verifier messages' section of Documentation/networking/filter.txt
provides several examples of these messages, like the program:
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_CALL_FUNC(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 4, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
will be rejected with the following multi-line message in log_buf:
0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0
1: (bf) r2 = r10
2: (07) r2 += -8
3: (b7) r1 = 0
4: (85) call 1
5: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1
R0=map_ptr R10=fp
6: (7a) *(u64 *)(r0 +4) = 0
misaligned access off 4 size 8
The format of the output can change at any time as verifier evolves.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
|
this patch adds all of eBPF verfier documentation and empty bpf_check()
The end goal for the verifier is to statically check safety of the program.
Verifier will catch:
- loops
- out of range jumps
- unreachable instructions
- invalid instructions
- uninitialized register access
- uninitialized stack access
- misaligned stack access
- out of range stack access
- invalid calling convention
More details in Documentation/networking/filter.txt
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
