Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/emulator: Bounds check reg nr against reg array size

From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/emulator: Bounds check reg nr against reg array size
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 17:32:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YofQlBrlx18J7h9Y@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220520165705.2140042-1-keescook@chromium.org>

On Fri, May 20, 2022, Kees Cook wrote:
> GCC 12 sees that it might be possible for "nr" to be outside the _regs
> array. Add explicit bounds checking.

I think GCC 12 is wrong.

There are four uses of reg_rmw() that don't use hardcoded registers:

   $ git grep reg_rmw | grep -v VCPU_REGS_
   emulate.c:static ulong *reg_rmw(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, unsigned nr)
1  emulate.c:	ulong *preg = reg_rmw(ctxt, reg);
2  emulate.c:		p = (unsigned char *)reg_rmw(ctxt, modrm_reg & 3) + 1;
3  emulate.c:		p = reg_rmw(ctxt, modrm_reg);
4  emulate.c:		assign_register(reg_rmw(ctxt, reg), val, ctxt->op_bytes);

#1 has three users, but two of those use hardcoded registers.

  $ git grep register_address_increment | grep -v VCPU_REGS_
  emulate.c:register_address_increment(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, int reg, int inc)
  emulate.c:	register_address_increment(ctxt, reg, df * op->bytes);

and that last one is string_addr_inc(), which is only called with RDI or RSI.

#2 can't overflow as the register can only be 0-3 (yay AH/BH/CH/DH operands).

#3 is the !highbyte path of decode_register(), and is a bit messy, but modrm_reg
is always sanitized.

   $ git grep -E "decode_register\("
   emulate.c:static void *decode_register(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, u8 modrm_reg,
a  emulate.c:      op->addr.reg = decode_register(ctxt, reg, ctxt->d & ByteOp);
b  emulate.c:              op->addr.reg = decode_register(ctxt, ctxt->modrm_rm,
c  emulate.c:                      ctxt->memop.addr.reg = decode_register(ctxt,
                                                                          ctxt->modrm_rm, true);

For (b) and (c), modrm_reg == ctxt->modrm_rm, which is computed in one place and
is bounded to 0-15:

	base_reg = (ctxt->rex_prefix << 3) & 8; /* REX.B */
	ctxt->modrm_rm = base_reg | (ctxt->modrm & 0x07);

For (a), "reg" is either modrm_reg or a register that is encoded in the opcode,
both of which are again bounded to 0-15:

	unsigned reg = ctxt->modrm_reg;

	if (!(ctxt->d & ModRM))
		reg = (ctxt->b & 7) | ((ctxt->rex_prefix & 1) << 3);

and

	ctxt->modrm_reg = ((ctxt->rex_prefix << 1) & 8); /* REX.R */
	ctxt->modrm_reg |= (ctxt->modrm & 0x38) >> 3;

#4 is em_popa() and is just funky hardcoding of popping RAX-RDI, minus RSP.

I did the same exercise for reg_reg() and write_reg(), and the handful of
non-hardcoded use are all bounded in similar ways.

> In function 'reg_read',
>     inlined from 'reg_rmw' at ../arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c:266:2:

Is there more of the "stack" available?  I don't mind the WARN too much, but if
there is a bug lurking I would much rather fix the bug.

> ../arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c:254:27: warning: array subscript 32 is above array bounds of 'long unsigned int[17]' [-Warray-bounds]
>   254 |         return ctxt->_regs[nr];
>       |                ~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~
> In file included from ../arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c:23:
> ../arch/x86/kvm/kvm_emulate.h: In function 'reg_rmw':
> ../arch/x86/kvm/kvm_emulate.h:366:23: note: while referencing '_regs'
>   366 |         unsigned long _regs[NR_VCPU_REGS];
>       |                       ^~~~~