diff options
| author |   Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> | 2018-12-03 22:46:06 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer |   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> | 2018-12-04 17:22:02 +0100 |
| commit | ceefbc96fa5c5b975d87bf8e89ba8416f6b764d9 (patch) | |
| tree | 46ba4c3e98ffb4eb565dfce9b0bb2fda5ef35ead /kernel | |
| parent | bpf: improve verifier branch analysis (diff) | |
| download | linux-dev-ceefbc96fa5c5b975d87bf8e89ba8416f6b764d9.tar.xz linux-dev-ceefbc96fa5c5b975d87bf8e89ba8416f6b764d9.zip | |
bpf: add per-insn complexity limit
malicious bpf program may try to force the verifier to remember
a lot of distinct verifier states.
Put a limit to number of per-insn 'struct bpf_verifier_state'.
Note that hitting the limit doesn't reject the program.
It potentially makes the verifier do more steps to analyze the program.
It means that malicious programs will hit BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS sooner
instead of spending cpu time walking long link list.
The limit of BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_STATES==64 affects cilium progs
with slight increase in number of "steps" it takes to successfully verify
the programs:
before after
bpf_lb-DLB_L3.o 1940 1940
bpf_lb-DLB_L4.o 3089 3089
bpf_lb-DUNKNOWN.o 1065 1065
bpf_lxc-DDROP_ALL.o 28052 | 28162
bpf_lxc-DUNKNOWN.o 35487 | 35541
bpf_netdev.o 10864 10864
bpf_overlay.o 6643 6643
bpf_lcx_jit.o 38437 38437
But it also makes malicious program to be rejected in 0.4 seconds vs 6.5
Hence apply this limit to unprivileged programs only.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel')
| -rw-r--r-- | kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 7 |
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 55a49703f423..fc760d00a38c 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -175,6 +175,7 @@ struct bpf_verifier_stack_elem { #define BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS 131072 #define BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_STACK 1024 +#define BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_STATES 64 #define BPF_MAP_PTR_UNPRIV 1UL #define BPF_MAP_PTR_POISON ((void *)((0xeB9FUL << 1) + \ @@ -5047,7 +5048,7 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) struct bpf_verifier_state_list *new_sl; struct bpf_verifier_state_list *sl; struct bpf_verifier_state *cur = env->cur_state, *new; - int i, j, err; + int i, j, err, states_cnt = 0; sl = env->explored_states[insn_idx]; if (!sl) @@ -5074,8 +5075,12 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) return 1; } sl = sl->next; + states_cnt++; } + if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks && states_cnt > BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_STATES) + return 0; + /* there were no equivalent states, remember current one. * technically the current state is not proven to be safe yet, * but it will either reach outer most bpf_exit (which means it's safe) |