Commit 37435f7e authored by Ben Hutchings's avatar Ben Hutchings Committed by Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf/verifier: Fix states_equal() comparison of pointer and UNKNOWN

An UNKNOWN_VALUE is not supposed to be derived from a pointer, unless
pointer leaks are allowed.  Therefore, states_equal() must not treat
a state with a pointer in a register as "equal" to a state with an
UNKNOWN_VALUE in that register.

This was fixed differently upstream, but the code around here was
largely rewritten in 4.14 by commit f1174f77 "bpf/verifier: rework
value tracking".  The bug can be detected by the bpf/verifier sub-test
"pointer/scalar confusion in state equality check (way 1)".
Signed-off-by: default avatarBen Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
parent 69cf72b2
......@@ -2722,11 +2722,12 @@ static bool states_equal(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
/* If we didn't map access then again we don't care about the
* mismatched range values and it's ok if our old type was
* UNKNOWN and we didn't go to a NOT_INIT'ed reg.
* UNKNOWN and we didn't go to a NOT_INIT'ed or pointer reg.
*/
if (rold->type == NOT_INIT ||
(!varlen_map_access && rold->type == UNKNOWN_VALUE &&
rcur->type != NOT_INIT))
rcur->type != NOT_INIT &&
!__is_pointer_value(env->allow_ptr_leaks, rcur)))
continue;
/* Don't care about the reg->id in this case. */
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment