All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
To: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <kernel-team@fb.com>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Do not mark certain LSM hook arguments as trusted
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2022 12:49:54 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221203204954.2043348-1-yhs@fb.com> (raw)

Martin mentioned that the verifier cannot assume arguments from
LSM hook sk_alloc_security being trusted since after the hook
is called, the sk ref_count is set to 1. This will overwrite
the ref_count changed by the bpf program and may cause ref_count
underflow later on.

I then further checked some other hooks. For example,
for bpf_lsm_file_alloc() hook in fs/file_table.c,

        f->f_cred = get_cred(cred);
        error = security_file_alloc(f);
        if (unlikely(error)) {
                file_free_rcu(&f->f_rcuhead);
                return ERR_PTR(error);
        }

        atomic_long_set(&f->f_count, 1);

The input parameter 'f' to security_file_alloc() cannot be trusted
as well.

Specifically, I investiaged bpf_map/bpf_prog/file/sk/task alloc/free
lsm hooks. Except bpf_map_alloc and task_alloc, arguments for all other
hooks should not be considered as trusted. This may not be a complete
list, but it covers common usage for sk and task.

Fixes: 3f00c5239344 ("bpf: Allow trusted pointers to be passed to KF_TRUSTED_ARGS kfuncs")
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
---
 include/linux/bpf_lsm.h                          |  6 ++++++
 kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c                             | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 kernel/bpf/btf.c                                 |  2 ++
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c        |  1 +
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c     | 11 +++++++++++
 5 files changed, 36 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h b/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
index 4bcf76a9bb06..1de7ece5d36d 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ int bpf_lsm_verify_prog(struct bpf_verifier_log *vlog,
 			const struct bpf_prog *prog);
 
 bool bpf_lsm_is_sleepable_hook(u32 btf_id);
+bool bpf_lsm_is_trusted(const struct bpf_prog *prog);
 
 static inline struct bpf_storage_blob *bpf_inode(
 	const struct inode *inode)
@@ -51,6 +52,11 @@ static inline bool bpf_lsm_is_sleepable_hook(u32 btf_id)
 	return false;
 }
 
+static inline bool bpf_lsm_is_trusted(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
+{
+	return false;
+}
+
 static inline int bpf_lsm_verify_prog(struct bpf_verifier_log *vlog,
 				      const struct bpf_prog *prog)
 {
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
index ae0267f150b5..9ea42a45da47 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
@@ -345,11 +345,27 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_to_inode)
 BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_userns_create)
 BTF_SET_END(sleepable_lsm_hooks)
 
+BTF_SET_START(untrusted_lsm_hooks)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_bpf_map_free_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_bpf_prog_alloc_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_bpf_prog_free_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_file_alloc_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_file_free_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sk_alloc_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sk_free_security)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_free)
+BTF_SET_END(untrusted_lsm_hooks)
+
 bool bpf_lsm_is_sleepable_hook(u32 btf_id)
 {
 	return btf_id_set_contains(&sleepable_lsm_hooks, btf_id);
 }
 
+bool bpf_lsm_is_trusted(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
+{
+	return !btf_id_set_contains(&untrusted_lsm_hooks, prog->aux->attach_btf_id);
+}
+
 const struct bpf_prog_ops lsm_prog_ops = {
 };
 
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/btf.c b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
index d11cbf8cece7..c80bd8709e69 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include <linux/bpf_verifier.h>
 #include <linux/btf.h>
 #include <linux/btf_ids.h>
+#include <linux/bpf_lsm.h>
 #include <linux/skmsg.h>
 #include <linux/perf_event.h>
 #include <linux/bsearch.h>
@@ -5829,6 +5830,7 @@ static bool prog_args_trusted(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
 	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING:
 		return atype == BPF_TRACE_RAW_TP || atype == BPF_TRACE_ITER;
 	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM:
+		return bpf_lsm_is_trusted(prog);
 	case BPF_PROG_TYPE_STRUCT_OPS:
 		return true;
 	default:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
index ffd8ef4303c8..18848c31e36f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ static struct {
 	{"task_kfunc_release_null", "arg#0 is ptr_or_null_ expected ptr_ or socket"},
 	{"task_kfunc_release_unacquired", "release kernel function bpf_task_release expects"},
 	{"task_kfunc_from_pid_no_null_check", "arg#0 is ptr_or_null_ expected ptr_ or socket"},
+	{"task_kfunc_from_lsm_task_free", "reg type unsupported for arg#0 function"},
 };
 
 static void verify_fail(const char *prog_name, const char *expected_err_msg)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c
index e310473190d5..87fa1db9d9b5 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c
@@ -271,3 +271,14 @@ int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_from_pid_no_null_check, struct task_struct *task, u64 cl
 
 	return 0;
 }
+
+SEC("lsm/task_free")
+int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_from_lsm_task_free, struct task_struct *task)
+{
+	struct task_struct *acquired;
+
+	/* the argument of lsm task_free hook is untrusted. */
+	acquired = bpf_task_acquire(task);
+	bpf_task_release(acquired);
+	return 0;
+}
-- 
2.30.2


             reply	other threads:[~2022-12-03 20:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-03 20:49 Yonghong Song [this message]
2022-12-04 21:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Do not mark certain LSM hook arguments as trusted patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20221203204954.2043348-1-yhs@fb.com \
    --to=yhs@fb.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.