Bug 2330351 (CVE-2024-53125) - CVE-2024-53125 kernel: bpf: sync_linked_regs() must preserve subreg_def
Summary: CVE-2024-53125 kernel: bpf: sync_linked_regs() must preserve subreg_def
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: CVE-2024-53125
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Product Security DevOps Team
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2330494
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2024-12-04 15:02 UTC by OSIDB Bzimport
Modified: 2024-12-05 04:58 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2024-12-04 15:02:10 UTC
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

bpf: sync_linked_regs() must preserve subreg_def

Range propagation must not affect subreg_def marks, otherwise the
following example is rewritten by verifier incorrectly when
BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag is set:

  0: call bpf_ktime_get_ns                   call bpf_ktime_get_ns
  1: r0 &= 0x7fffffff       after verifier   r0 &= 0x7fffffff
  2: w1 = w0                rewrites         w1 = w0
  3: if w0 < 10 goto +0     -------------->  r11 = 0x2f5674a6     (r)
  4: r1 >>= 32                               r11 <<= 32           (r)
  5: r0 = r1                                 r1 |= r11            (r)
  6: exit;                                   if w0 < 0xa goto pc+0
                                             r1 >>= 32
                                             r0 = r1
                                             exit

(or zero extension of w1 at (2) is missing for architectures that
 require zero extension for upper register half).

The following happens w/o this patch:
- r0 is marked as not a subreg at (0);
- w1 is marked as subreg at (2);
- w1 subreg_def is overridden at (3) by copy_register_state();
- w1 is read at (5) but mark_insn_zext() does not mark (2)
  for zero extension, because w1 subreg_def is not set;
- because of BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag verifier inserts random
  value for hi32 bits of (2) (marked (r));
- this random value is read at (5).

Comment 1 Avinash Hanwate 2024-12-05 04:10:47 UTC
Upstream advisory:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2024120413-CVE-2024-53125-69ff@gregkh/T


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.