Daniel Borkmann a12ca6277e bpf: Fix incorrect verifier simulation around jmp32's jeq/jne
Kuee reported a quirk in the jmp32's jeq/jne simulation, namely that the
register value does not match expectations for the fall-through path. For
example:

Before fix:

  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  0: (b7) r2 = 0                        ; R2_w=P0
  1: (b7) r6 = 563                      ; R6_w=P563
  2: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  3: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  4: (4c) w2 |= w6                      ; R2_w=Pscalar(umin=563,umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x233; 0xfffffdcc),s32_min=-2147483085) R6_w=P563
  5: (56) if w2 != 0x8 goto pc+1        ; R2_w=P571  <--- [*]
  6: (95) exit
  R0 !read_ok

After fix:

  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  0: (b7) r2 = 0                        ; R2_w=P0
  1: (b7) r6 = 563                      ; R6_w=P563
  2: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  3: (87) r2 = -r2                      ; R2_w=Pscalar()
  4: (4c) w2 |= w6                      ; R2_w=Pscalar(umin=563,umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x233; 0xfffffdcc),s32_min=-2147483085) R6_w=P563
  5: (56) if w2 != 0x8 goto pc+1        ; R2_w=P8  <--- [*]
  6: (95) exit
  R0 !read_ok

As can be seen on line 5 for the branch fall-through path in R2 [*] is that
given condition w2 != 0x8 is false, verifier should conclude that r2 = 8 as
upper 32 bit are known to be zero. However, verifier incorrectly concludes
that r2 = 571 which is far off.

The problem is it only marks false{true}_reg as known in the switch for JE/NE
case, but at the end of the function, it uses {false,true}_{64,32}off to
update {false,true}_reg->var_off and they still hold the prior value of
{false,true}_reg->var_off before it got marked as known. The subsequent
__reg_combine_32_into_64() then propagates this old var_off and derives new
bounds. The information between min/max bounds on {false,true}_reg from
setting the register to known const combined with the {false,true}_reg->var_off
based on the old information then derives wrong register data.

Fix it by detangling the BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE cases and updating relevant
{false,true}_{64,32}off tnums along with the register marking to known
constant.

Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
Reported-by: Kuee K1r0a <liulin063@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220701124727.11153-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
2022-07-01 12:56:27 -07:00
..
2022-05-26 17:13:43 -07:00
2022-06-02 07:17:59 +02:00
2022-06-05 10:40:31 -07:00
2022-05-25 16:18:27 -07:00
2021-12-02 17:25:21 +09:00
2022-05-25 11:32:53 -07:00
2022-06-02 08:55:01 -07:00
2022-05-26 16:57:20 -07:00
2022-05-27 21:24:19 -07:00
2022-05-26 16:57:20 -07:00
2022-01-11 13:08:21 -08:00
2021-09-08 15:32:35 -07:00
2022-05-23 17:51:12 -07:00
2022-03-15 10:32:44 +01:00
2022-03-28 17:29:53 -07:00
2021-06-18 11:43:08 +02:00
2021-09-08 15:32:34 -07:00
2021-05-07 00:26:33 -07:00
2022-05-29 10:31:36 -07:00
2022-05-02 14:06:20 -06:00
2022-05-26 16:57:20 -07:00
2021-10-14 13:29:18 +02:00
2022-01-08 12:43:57 -06:00
2022-05-24 11:11:13 -07:00
2022-02-25 09:36:06 +01:00
2022-05-26 16:57:20 -07:00