net: filter: be more defensive on div/mod by X==0
The old interpreter behaviour was that we returned with 0 whenever we found a division by 0 would take place. In the new interpreter we would currently just skip that instead and continue execution. It's true that a value of 0 as return might not be appropriate in all cases, but current users (socket filters -> drop packet, seccomp -> SECCOMP_RET_KILL, cls_bpf -> unclassified, etc) seem fine with that behaviour. Better this than undefined BPF program behaviour as it's expected that A contains the result of the division. In future, as more use cases open up, we could further adapt this return value to our needs, if necessary. So reintroduce return of 0 for division by 0 as in the old interpreter. Also in case of K which is guaranteed to be 32bit wide, sk_chk_filter() already takes care of preventing division by 0 invoked through K, so we can generally spare us these tests. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
parent
d80e773f16
commit
5f9fde5f79
1 changed files with 16 additions and 16 deletions
|
@ -295,43 +295,43 @@ unsigned int __sk_run_filter(void *ctx, const struct sock_filter_int *insn)
|
||||||
(*(s64 *) &A) >>= K;
|
(*(s64 *) &A) >>= K;
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU64_BPF_MOD_BPF_X:
|
BPF_ALU64_BPF_MOD_BPF_X:
|
||||||
|
if (unlikely(X == 0))
|
||||||
|
return 0;
|
||||||
tmp = A;
|
tmp = A;
|
||||||
if (X)
|
A = do_div(tmp, X);
|
||||||
A = do_div(tmp, X);
|
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU_BPF_MOD_BPF_X:
|
BPF_ALU_BPF_MOD_BPF_X:
|
||||||
|
if (unlikely(X == 0))
|
||||||
|
return 0;
|
||||||
tmp = (u32) A;
|
tmp = (u32) A;
|
||||||
if (X)
|
A = do_div(tmp, (u32) X);
|
||||||
A = do_div(tmp, (u32) X);
|
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU64_BPF_MOD_BPF_K:
|
BPF_ALU64_BPF_MOD_BPF_K:
|
||||||
tmp = A;
|
tmp = A;
|
||||||
if (K)
|
A = do_div(tmp, K);
|
||||||
A = do_div(tmp, K);
|
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU_BPF_MOD_BPF_K:
|
BPF_ALU_BPF_MOD_BPF_K:
|
||||||
tmp = (u32) A;
|
tmp = (u32) A;
|
||||||
if (K)
|
A = do_div(tmp, (u32) K);
|
||||||
A = do_div(tmp, (u32) K);
|
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU64_BPF_DIV_BPF_X:
|
BPF_ALU64_BPF_DIV_BPF_X:
|
||||||
if (X)
|
if (unlikely(X == 0))
|
||||||
do_div(A, X);
|
return 0;
|
||||||
|
do_div(A, X);
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU_BPF_DIV_BPF_X:
|
BPF_ALU_BPF_DIV_BPF_X:
|
||||||
|
if (unlikely(X == 0))
|
||||||
|
return 0;
|
||||||
tmp = (u32) A;
|
tmp = (u32) A;
|
||||||
if (X)
|
do_div(tmp, (u32) X);
|
||||||
do_div(tmp, (u32) X);
|
|
||||||
A = (u32) tmp;
|
A = (u32) tmp;
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU64_BPF_DIV_BPF_K:
|
BPF_ALU64_BPF_DIV_BPF_K:
|
||||||
if (K)
|
do_div(A, K);
|
||||||
do_div(A, K);
|
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU_BPF_DIV_BPF_K:
|
BPF_ALU_BPF_DIV_BPF_K:
|
||||||
tmp = (u32) A;
|
tmp = (u32) A;
|
||||||
if (K)
|
do_div(tmp, (u32) K);
|
||||||
do_div(tmp, (u32) K);
|
|
||||||
A = (u32) tmp;
|
A = (u32) tmp;
|
||||||
CONT;
|
CONT;
|
||||||
BPF_ALU_BPF_END_BPF_TO_BE:
|
BPF_ALU_BPF_END_BPF_TO_BE:
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue