linux/debian/patches/bugfix/all/bpf-fix-incorrect-sign-exte...

45 lines
1.5 KiB
Diff

From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 20:11:54 -0800
Subject: [2/9] bpf: fix incorrect sign extension in check_alu_op()
Origin: https://git.kernel.org/linus/95a762e2c8c942780948091f8f2a4f32fce1ac6f
Distinguish between
BPF_ALU64|BPF_MOV|BPF_K (load 32-bit immediate, sign-extended to 64-bit)
and BPF_ALU|BPF_MOV|BPF_K (load 32-bit immediate, zero-padded to 64-bit);
only perform sign extension in the first case.
Starting with v4.14, this is exploitable by unprivileged users as long as
the unprivileged_bpf_disabled sysctl isn't set.
Debian assigned CVE-2017-16995 for this issue.
v3:
- add CVE number (Ben Hutchings)
Fixes: 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays")
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -2401,7 +2401,13 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verif
* remember the value we stored into this reg
*/
regs[insn->dst_reg].type = SCALAR_VALUE;
- __mark_reg_known(regs + insn->dst_reg, insn->imm);
+ if (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64) {
+ __mark_reg_known(regs + insn->dst_reg,
+ insn->imm);
+ } else {
+ __mark_reg_known(regs + insn->dst_reg,
+ (u32)insn->imm);
+ }
}
} else if (opcode > BPF_END) {