Hi Daniel, On Wed Nov 4, 2020 at 8:24 AM PST, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 11/4/20 3:29 AM, Daniel Xu wrote: > > do_strncpy_from_user() may copy some extra bytes after the NUL > > terminator into the destination buffer. This usually does not matter for > > normal string operations. However, when BPF programs key BPF maps with > > strings, this matters a lot. > > > > A BPF program may read strings from user memory by calling the > > bpf_probe_read_user_str() helper which eventually calls > > do_strncpy_from_user(). The program can then key a map with the > > resulting string. BPF map keys are fixed-width and string-agnostic, > > meaning that map keys are treated as a set of bytes. > > > > The issue is when do_strncpy_from_user() overcopies bytes after the NUL > > terminator, it can result in seemingly identical strings occupying > > multiple slots in a BPF map. This behavior is subtle and totally > > unexpected by the user. > > > > This commit uses the proper word-at-a-time APIs to avoid overcopying. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@xxxxxxxxx> > > It looks like this is a regression from the recent refactoring of the > mem probing > util functions? I think it was like this from the beginning, at 6ae08ae3dea2 ("bpf: Add probe_read_{user, kernel} and probe_read_{user, kernel}_str helpers"). The old bpf_probe_read_str() used the kernel's byte-by-byte copying routine. bpf_probe_read_user_str() started using strncpy_from_user() which has been doing the long-sized strides since ~2012 or earlier. I tried to build and test the kernel at that commit but it seems my compiler is too new to build that old code. Bunch of build failures. I assume the refactor you're referring to is 8d92db5c04d1 ("bpf: rework the compat kernel probe handling"). > Could we add a Fixes tag and then we'd also need to target the fix > against bpf tree instead of bpf-next, no? Sure, will do in v2. > > Moreover, a BPF kselftest would help to make sure it doesn't regress in > future again. Ditto. [..] Thanks, Daniel