[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e8125c86-7638-e5bc-eb9f-fca8b009f219@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2020 08:44:23 +0800
From: zerons <zeronsaxm@...il.com>
To: alex.popov@...ux.com
Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Shawn <citypw@...denedlinux.org>,
spender@...ecurity.net, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: Maybe inappropriate use BUG_ON() in CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_HARDENED
On 2/27/20 19:28, Alexander Popov wrote:
> On 19.02.2020 16:43, zerons wrote:
>> This patch does work for cve-2017-2636 case, it is barely impossible to win the
>> race. My concern is based on an assumption: we do have a double kfree() bug and
>> we can win the race.
>
> Yes, I agree that the double-free check in CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_HARDENED can be
> bypassed in some cases by winning the race and inserting kmalloc() between kfree().
>
> But I *don't* agree that this double-free check can help the attacker.
>
> Without this check in CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_HARDENED, double-free exploitation is
> always easier, since the attacker has no need to race at all. In the write-up
> about CVE-2017-2636 exploit [1] I showed how to do heap spray *after*
> double-free (kfree-kfree-kmalloc-kmalloc).
>
I thought the freelist obfuscation[1] and prefecth next pointer[2]
may block this method(kfree-kfree-kmalloc-kmalloc), and the
prefetch_freepointer() should've stopped the 2nd kmalloc().
Today, I did some tests on Ubuntu 18.04 with kernel 5.3.18,
without your patch.
Here is the code. It writes something to modprobe_path for debugging.
After the 2nd kmalloc() return, ptr0 == ptr1 is true, which means
the attacker could have two objects point to same memory area.
Although the system now is quite fragile: the next kmalloc()
would trigger do_general_protection() since the c->freelist is
something like 0x4141414141414141, the attacker still can win.
=======================================================================
#define TARGET_SIZE 0x1000
static int __init test_init(void)
{
char *ptr0, *ptr1, *ptr2;
char *path_addr;
size_t l = 0;
path_addr = (char *)kallsyms_lookup_name("modprobe_path");
while (1) {
if (!*(path_addr+l))
break;
l++;
}
l += 8 - (l%8);
ptr0 = kmalloc(TARGET_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l) = (unsigned long)ptr0;
kfree(ptr0);
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+8) = *(unsigned long *)ptr0;
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x10) = (unsigned long)ptr0;
kfree(ptr0);
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x18) = *(unsigned long *)ptr0;
ptr0 = kmalloc(TARGET_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x20) = (unsigned long)ptr0;
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x28) = *(unsigned long *)ptr0;
ptr1 = kmalloc(TARGET_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x30) = (unsigned long)ptr1;
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x38) = *(unsigned long *)ptr0;
#if 0
ptr2 = kmalloc(TARGET_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x40) = (unsigned long)ptr2;
*(unsigned long *)(path_addr+l+0x48) = *(unsigned long *)ptr0;
#endif
return 0;
}
==========================================================================
[1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=2482ddec
[2]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=0ad9500e1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
