[PATCH 6.12 103/466] bpf: Dont mark STACK_INVALID as STACK_MISC in mark_stack_slot_misc

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



6.12-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx>

[ Upstream commit 69772f509e084ec6bca12dbcdeeeff41b0103774 ]

Inside mark_stack_slot_misc, we should not upgrade STACK_INVALID to
STACK_MISC when allow_ptr_leaks is false, since invalid contents
shouldn't be read unless the program has the relevant capabilities.
The relaxation only makes sense when env->allow_ptr_leaks is true.

However, such conversion in privileged mode becomes unnecessary, as
invalid slots can be read without being upgraded to STACK_MISC.

Currently, the condition is inverted (i.e. checking for true instead of
false), simply remove it to restore correct behavior.

Fixes: eaf18febd6eb ("bpf: preserve STACK_ZERO slots on partial reg spills")
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Tao Lyu <tao.lyu@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241204044757.1483141-2-memxor@xxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 9 ++++++---
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 8955259112c03..cdf8ce1e2cc4f 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1200,14 +1200,17 @@ static bool is_spilled_scalar_reg64(const struct bpf_stack_state *stack)
 /* Mark stack slot as STACK_MISC, unless it is already STACK_INVALID, in which
  * case they are equivalent, or it's STACK_ZERO, in which case we preserve
  * more precise STACK_ZERO.
- * Note, in uprivileged mode leaving STACK_INVALID is wrong, so we take
- * env->allow_ptr_leaks into account and force STACK_MISC, if necessary.
+ * Regardless of allow_ptr_leaks setting (i.e., privileged or unprivileged
+ * mode), we won't promote STACK_INVALID to STACK_MISC. In privileged case it is
+ * unnecessary as both are considered equivalent when loading data and pruning,
+ * in case of unprivileged mode it will be incorrect to allow reads of invalid
+ * slots.
  */
 static void mark_stack_slot_misc(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u8 *stype)
 {
 	if (*stype == STACK_ZERO)
 		return;
-	if (env->allow_ptr_leaks && *stype == STACK_INVALID)
+	if (*stype == STACK_INVALID)
 		return;
 	*stype = STACK_MISC;
 }
-- 
2.43.0







[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux