This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
bpf: Fix the off-by-two error in range markings
to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
bpf-fix-the-off-by-two-error-in-range-markings.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
>From 2fa7d94afc1afbb4d702760c058dc2d7ed30f226 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 20:16:07 +0200
Subject: bpf: Fix the off-by-two error in range markings
From: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@xxxxxxxxxx>
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 <maximmi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211130181607.593149-1-maximmi@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -2989,7 +2989,7 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struc
new_range = dst_reg->off;
if (range_right_open)
- new_range--;
+ new_range++;
/* Examples for register markings:
*
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from maximmi@xxxxxxxxxx are
queue-4.14/bpf-fix-the-off-by-two-error-in-range-markings.patch
