This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
bpf: Fix incorrect verifier pruning due to missing register precision taints
to the 5.10-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-incorrect-verifier-pruning-due-to-missing-re.patch
and it can be found in the queue-5.10 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
commit 991a589ec815ad525d6be14735e26650f204971a
Author: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue Apr 11 15:24:13 2023 +0000
bpf: Fix incorrect verifier pruning due to missing register precision taints
[ Upstream commit 71b547f561247897a0a14f3082730156c0533fed ]
Juan Jose et al reported an issue found via fuzzing where the verifier's
pruning logic prematurely marks a program path as safe.
Consider the following program:
0: (b7) r6 = 1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0
2: (b7) r8 = 0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
7: (97) r6 %= 1
8: (b7) r9 = 0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
10: (b7) r6 = 0
11: (b7) r0 = 0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff888103693400 // map_ptr(ks=4,vs=48)
15: (bf) r1 = r4
16: (bf) r2 = r10
17: (07) r2 += -4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
20: (95) exit
21: (77) r6 >>= 10
22: (27) r6 *= 8192
23: (bf) r1 = r0
24: (0f) r0 += r6
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0)
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3
27: (95) exit
The verifier treats this as safe, leading to oob read/write access due
to an incorrect verifier conclusion:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r6 = 1024 ; R6_w=1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0 ; R7_w=0
2: (b7) r8 = 0 ; R8_w=0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648 ; R9_w=-2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025 ; R6_w=scalar()
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2 ; R6_w=scalar(umin=18446744071562067969,var_off=(0xffffffff00000000; 0xffffffff)) R9_w=-2147483648
7: (97) r6 %= 1 ; R6_w=scalar()
8: (b7) r9 = 0 ; R9=0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
10: (b7) r6 = 0 ; R6_w=0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 9
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=0
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=0
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 19
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_rw=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 18 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 10: (b7) r6 = 0
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0) ; R0_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3 ; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
27: (95) exit
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff8ad3886c2a00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_r=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar() R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_rw=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 8 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 8: (b7) r9 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 7: (97) r6 %= 1
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=40 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=40 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=40 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
19: safe
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=40 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=40 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=40 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
from 6 to 9: safe
verification time 110 usec
stack depth 4
processed 36 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 3 peak_states 3 mark_read 2
The verifier considers this program as safe by mistakenly pruning unsafe
code paths. In the above func#0, code lines 0-10 are of interest. In line
0-3 registers r6 to r9 are initialized with known scalar values. In line 4
the register r6 is reset to an unknown scalar given the verifier does not
track modulo operations. Due to this, the verifier can also not determine
precisely which branches in line 6 and 9 are taken, therefore it needs to
explore them both.
As can be seen, the verifier starts with exploring the false/fall-through
paths first. The 'from 19 to 21' path has both r6=0 and r9=0 and the pointer
arithmetic on r0 += r6 is therefore considered safe. Given the arithmetic,
r6 is correctly marked for precision tracking where backtracking kicks in
where it walks back the current path all the way where r6 was set to 0 in
the fall-through branch.
Next, the pruning logics pops the path 'from 9 to 11' from the stack. Also
here, the state of the registers is the same, that is, r6=0 and r9=0, so
that at line 19 the path can be pruned as it is considered safe. It is
interesting to note that the conditional in line 9 turned r6 into a more
precise state, that is, in the fall-through path at the beginning of line
10, it is R6=scalar(umin=1), and in the branch-taken path (which is analyzed
here) at the beginning of line 11, r6 turned into a known const r6=0 as
r9=0 prior to that and therefore (unsigned) r6 <= 0 concludes that r6 must
be 0 (**):
[...] ; R6_w=scalar()
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
[...]
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
[...]
The next path is 'from 6 to 9'. The verifier considers the old and current
state equivalent, and therefore prunes the search incorrectly. Looking into
the two states which are being compared by the pruning logic at line 9, the
old state consists of R6_rwD=Pscalar() R9_rwD=0 R10=fp0 and the new state
consists of R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_w=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968)
R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0. While r6 had the reg->precise flag
correctly set in the old state, r9 did not. Both r6'es are considered as
equivalent given the old one is a superset of the current, more precise one,
however, r9's actual values (0 vs 0x80000000) mismatch. Given the old r9
did not have reg->precise flag set, the verifier does not consider the
register as contributing to the precision state of r6, and therefore it
considered both r9 states as equivalent. However, for this specific pruned
path (which is also the actual path taken at runtime), register r6 will be
0x400 and r9 0x80000000 when reaching line 21, thus oob-accessing the map.
The purpose of precision tracking is to initially mark registers (including
spilled ones) as imprecise to help verifier's pruning logic finding equivalent
states it can then prune if they don't contribute to the program's safety
aspects. For example, if registers are used for pointer arithmetic or to pass
constant length to a helper, then the verifier sets reg->precise flag and
backtracks the BPF program instruction sequence and chain of verifier states
to ensure that the given register or stack slot including their dependencies
are marked as precisely tracked scalar. This also includes any other registers
and slots that contribute to a tracked state of given registers/stack slot.
This backtracking relies on recorded jmp_history and is able to traverse
entire chain of parent states. This process ends only when all the necessary
registers/slots and their transitive dependencies are marked as precise.
The backtrack_insn() is called from the current instruction up to the first
instruction, and its purpose is to compute a bitmask of registers and stack
slots that need precision tracking in the parent's verifier state. For example,
if a current instruction is r6 = r7, then r6 needs precision after this
instruction and r7 needs precision before this instruction, that is, in the
parent state. Hence for the latter r7 is marked and r6 unmarked.
For the class of jmp/jmp32 instructions, backtrack_insn() today only looks
at call and exit instructions and for all other conditionals the masks
remain as-is. However, in the given situation register r6 has a dependency
on r9 (as described above in **), so also that one needs to be marked for
precision tracking. In other words, if an imprecise register influences a
precise one, then the imprecise register should also be marked precise.
Meaning, in the parent state both dest and src register need to be tracked
for precision and therefore the marking must be more conservative by setting
reg->precise flag for both. The precision propagation needs to cover both
for the conditional: if the src reg was marked but not the dst reg and vice
versa.
After the fix the program is correctly rejected:
func#0 @0
0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
0: (b7) r6 = 1024 ; R6_w=1024
1: (b7) r7 = 0 ; R7_w=0
2: (b7) r8 = 0 ; R8_w=0
3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648 ; R9_w=-2147483648
4: (97) r6 %= 1025 ; R6_w=scalar()
5: (05) goto pc+0
6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2 ; R6_w=scalar(umin=18446744071562067969,var_off=(0xffffffff80000000; 0x7fffffff),u32_min=-2147483648) R9_w=-2147483648
7: (97) r6 %= 1 ; R6_w=scalar()
8: (b7) r9 = 0 ; R9=0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1 ; R6=scalar(umin=1) R9=0
10: (b7) r6 = 0 ; R6_w=0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 9
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=0
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=0
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 19
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value_or_null(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_rw=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 18 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 10: (b7) r6 = 0
25: (79) r3 = *(u64 *)(r0 +0) ; R0_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
26: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r3 ; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R3_w=scalar()
27: (95) exit
from 9 to 11: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6=0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
frame 0: propagating r6
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_r=P0 R7=0 R8=0 R9=0 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 9
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
parent didn't have regs=240 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar() R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_rw=P0 R10=fp0
last_idx 8 first_idx 0
regs=240 stack=0 before 8: (b7) r9 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 7: (97) r6 %= 1
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
19: safe
from 6 to 9: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_w=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0
9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=200 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
11: R6=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R9=-2147483648
11: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
last_idx 12 first_idx 11
regs=1 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
13: R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8=0000????
13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00 ; R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
15: (bf) r1 = r4 ; R1_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R4_w=map_ptr(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
16: (bf) r2 = r10 ; R2_w=fp0 R10=fp0
17: (07) r2 += -4 ; R2_w=fp-4
18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 ; R0_w=map_value_or_null(id=3,off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1 ; R0_w=0
20: (95) exit
from 19 to 21: R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6=scalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7=0 R8=0 R9=-2147483648 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
21: (77) r6 >>= 10 ; R6_w=scalar(umax=18014398507384832,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fffffffffffff))
22: (27) r6 *= 8192 ; R6_w=scalar(smax=9223372036854767616,umax=18446744073709543424,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffffffffe000),s32_max=2147475456,u32_max=-8192)
23: (bf) r1 = r0 ; R0=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0)
24: (0f) r0 += r6
last_idx 24 first_idx 21
regs=40 stack=0 before 23: (bf) r1 = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 22: (27) r6 *= 8192
regs=40 stack=0 before 21: (77) r6 >>= 10
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R0_rw=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=48,imm=0) R6_r=Pscalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7=0 R8=0 R9=-2147483648 R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmm????
last_idx 19 first_idx 11
regs=40 stack=0 before 19: (55) if r0 != 0x0 goto pc+1
regs=40 stack=0 before 18: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1
regs=40 stack=0 before 17: (07) r2 += -4
regs=40 stack=0 before 16: (bf) r2 = r10
regs=40 stack=0 before 15: (bf) r1 = r4
regs=40 stack=0 before 13: (18) r4 = 0xffff9290dc5bfe00
regs=40 stack=0 before 12: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r0
regs=40 stack=0 before 11: (b7) r0 = 0
parent didn't have regs=40 stack=0 marks: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R6_rw=Pscalar(umax=18446744071562067968) R7_w=0 R8_w=0 R9_w=-2147483648 R10=fp0
last_idx 9 first_idx 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 9: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+1
regs=240 stack=0 before 6: (bd) if r6 <= r9 goto pc+2
regs=240 stack=0 before 5: (05) goto pc+0
regs=240 stack=0 before 4: (97) r6 %= 1025
regs=240 stack=0 before 3: (b7) r9 = -2147483648
regs=40 stack=0 before 2: (b7) r8 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 1: (b7) r7 = 0
regs=40 stack=0 before 0: (b7) r6 = 1024
math between map_value pointer and register with unbounded min value is not allowed
verification time 886 usec
stack depth 4
processed 49 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 1 total_states 5 peak_states 5 mark_read 2
Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Reported-by: Juan Jose Lopez Jaimez <jjlopezjaimez@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Meador Inge <meadori@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Simon Scannell <simonscannell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Nenad Stojanovski <thenenadx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Co-developed-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Juan Jose Lopez Jaimez <jjlopezjaimez@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Meador Inge <meadori@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Simon Scannell <simonscannell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 9e5f1ebe67d7f..5a96a9dd51e4c 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1931,6 +1931,21 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx,
}
} else if (opcode == BPF_EXIT) {
return -ENOTSUPP;
+ } else if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X) {
+ if (!(*reg_mask & (dreg | sreg)))
+ return 0;
+ /* dreg <cond> sreg
+ * Both dreg and sreg need precision before
+ * this insn. If only sreg was marked precise
+ * before it would be equally necessary to
+ * propagate it to dreg.
+ */
+ *reg_mask |= (sreg | dreg);
+ /* else dreg <cond> K
+ * Only dreg still needs precision before
+ * this insn, so for the K-based conditional
+ * there is nothing new to be marked.
+ */
}
} else if (class == BPF_LD) {
if (!(*reg_mask & dreg))
