HackDig : Dig high-quality web security articles for hacker

Case study: Searching for a vulnerability pattern in the Linux kernel

2019-10-18 04:20
This short article describes the investigation of one funny Linux kernel vulnerability and my experience with Semmle QL and Coccinelle, which I used to search for similar bugs.

The kernel bug

Several days ago my custom syzkaller instance got an interesting crash. It had a stable reproducer and I started the investigation. Here I will take the opportunity to say that syzkaller is an awesome project with a great impact on our industry. A tip of my hat to the people working on it!

I found out that the bug causing this crash was introduced to drivers/block/floppy.c in commit 229b53c9bf4e (June 2017).

The compat_getdrvstat() function has the following code:

static int compat_getdrvstat(int drive, bool poll,
                            struct compat_floppy_drive_struct __user *arg)
{
        struct compat_floppy_drive_struct v;

        memset(&v, 0, sizeof(struct compat_floppy_drive_struct));

...
        if (copy_from_user(arg, &v, sizeof(struct compat_floppy_drive_struct)))
                return -EFAULT;
...
}

Here copy_from_user() has the userspace pointer arg as the copy destination and the kernelspace pointer &v as the source. That is obviously a bug. It can be triggered by a user with access to the floppy drive.

The effect of this bug on x86_64 is funny. It causes memset() of the userspace memory from the kernelspace:

  1. access_ok() for the copy_from_user() source (second parameter) fails. 
  2. copy_from_user() then tries to erase the copy destination (first parameter). 
  3. But the destination is in the userspace instead of kernelspace... 
  4. …so we have a kernel crash: 

[   40.937098] BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 0000000041414242
[   40.938714] #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode
[   40.939951] #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page
[   40.941121] PGD 7963f067 P4D 7963f067 PUD 0
[   40.942107] Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP NOPTI
[   40.942968] CPU: 0 PID: 292 Comm: d Not tainted 5.3.0-rc3+ #7
[   40.944288] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Ubuntu-1.8.2-1ubuntu1 04/01/2014
[   40.946478] RIP: 0010:__memset+0x24/0x30
[   40.947394] Code: 90 90 90 90 90 90 0f 1f 44 00 00 49 89 f9 48 89 d1 83 e2 07 48 c1 e9 03 40 0f b6 f6 48 b8 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 48 0f af c6 48 ab 89 d1 f3 aa 4c 89 c8 c3 90 49 89 f9 40 88 f0 48 89 d1 f3
[   40.951721] RSP: 0018:ffffc900003dbd58 EFLAGS: 00010206
[   40.952941] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000034 RCX: 0000000000000006
[   40.954592] RDX: 0000000000000004 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000041414242
[   40.956169] RBP: 0000000041414242 R08: ffffffff8200bd80 R09: 0000000041414242
[   40.957753] R10: 0000000000121806 R11: ffff88807da28ab0 R12: ffffc900003dbd7c
[   40.959407] R13: 0000000000000001 R14: 0000000041414242 R15: 0000000041414242
[   40.961062] FS:  00007f91115c4440(0000) GS:ffff88807da00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[   40.962603] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[   40.963695] CR2: 0000000041414242 CR3: 000000007c584000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
[   40.965004] Call Trace:
[   40.965459]  _copy_from_user+0x51/0x60
[   40.966141]  compat_getdrvstat+0x124/0x170
[   40.966781]  fd_compat_ioctl+0x69c/0x6d0
[   40.967423]  ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x16f/0x210
[   40.968117]  compat_blkdev_ioctl+0x21d/0x8f0
[   40.968864]  __x32_compat_sys_ioctl+0x99/0x250
[   40.969659]  do_syscall_64+0x4a/0x110
[   40.970337]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

I haven't found a way to exploit it for privilege escalation.

Kudos to my friends for their advice and jokes—we had a nice time playing with it!


Variant analysis: Semmle QL

My first thought was to search for similar issues throughout the entire kernel source code. I decided to try Semmle QL for that (Semmle has been very active recently). There is a nice introduction to QL and LGTM with enough information for a quick start.

So I opened the Linux kernel project in the Query console and just searched for copy_from_user() calls:

import cpp

from FunctionCall call

where call.getTarget().getName() = "copy_from_user"
select call, "I see a copy_from_user here!"

This query gave only 616 results. That's strange, since the Linux kernel has many more copy_from_user() calls than that. I found the answer in the LGTM documentation:

LGTM extracts information from each codebase and generates a database
ready for querying. For C/C++ projects, the source code is built
as part of the extraction process.

So the Linux kernel config used for kernel build is limiting the scope of LGTM analysis. If some kernel subsystem is not enabled in the config, it is not built and hence we can't analyze its code in LGTM.

The LGTM documentation also says that:
You may need to customize the process to enable LGTM to build the project.
You can do this by adding to your repository an lgtm.yml file for your project.

I decided to create a custom lgtm.yml file for the Linux kernel and asked for a default one on the LGTM community forum.

The answer from the LGTM Team was really fast and helpful:

The worker machines we use on lgtm.com are small and resource-constrained,
so unfortunately make defconfig is just about the biggest config we can use.
It takes 3.5 hours for the full build+extraction+analysis for every commit,
and we allow 4 hours at most.

That's not good, however they are currently working on a solution for big projects.
So I decided to try another tool for my investigation.

Variant analysis: Coccinelle

I had heard about Coccinelle. The Linux kernel community uses this tool a lot. Moreover, I remembered that Kees Cook searched for copy_from_user() mistakes with Coccinelle. So I started to learn the Semantic Patch Language (SmPL) and finally wrote this rule (thanks to Julia Lawall for feedback):

virtual report

@cfu exists@

identifier f;
type t;
identifier v;
position decl_p;
position copy_p;
@@

f(..., t v@decl_p, ...)

{
... when any
copy_from_user@copy_p(v, ...)
... when any
}

@script:python@

f << cfu.f;
t << cfu.t;
v << cfu.v;
decl_p << cfu.decl_p;
copy_p << cfu.copy_p;
@@

if '__user' in t:

  msg0 = "function "" + f + "" has arg "" + v + "" of type "" + t + """
  coccilib.report.print_report(decl_p[0], msg0)
  msg1 = "copy_from_user uses "" + v + "" as the destination. What a shame!n"
  coccilib.report.print_report(copy_p[0], msg1)

The idea behind it is simple. Usually copy_from_user() is called in functions that take a userspace pointer as a parameter. My rule describes the case when copy_from_user() takes the userspace pointer as the copy destination:

  • The main part of the rule finds all cases when a parameter v of some function f() is used as the first parameter of copy_from_user().
  • In case of a match, the Python script checks whether v has the __user annotation in its type. 

Here is the Coccinelle output:

./drivers/block/floppy.c:3756:49-52: function "compat_getdrvprm" has arg "arg"
of type "struct compat_floppy_drive_params __user *"
./drivers/block/floppy.c:3783:5-19: copy_from_user uses "arg" as the
destination. What a shame!

./drivers/block/floppy.c:3789:49-52: function "compat_getdrvstat" has arg "arg"

of type "struct compat_floppy_drive_struct __user *"
./drivers/block/floppy.c:3819:5-19: copy_from_user uses "arg" as the
destination. What a shame!

So there are two (not very dangerous) kernel vulnerabilities that fit this bug pattern.

Public zero-days

It turned out that I was not the first to find these bugs. Jann Horn reported them in March 2019. He used sparse to find them. I'm absolutely sure that it can find many more error cases than my PoC Coccinelle rule.

But in fact, Jann's patch was lost and it didn't get into the mainline.
So these two bugs could be called "public zero-days" :-)

Anyway, I've reported this issue to LKML, and Jens Axboe will apply Jann's lost patch for Linux kernel v5.4.

Author: Alexander Popov, Positive Technologies


Source: 3033802262090973997-tsop.4270442007648399458-golb:9991,moc.reggolb:gat

Read:261 | Comments:0 | Tags: Vulnerability

“Case study: Searching for a vulnerability pattern in the Linux kernel”0 Comments

Submit A Comment

Name:

Email:

Blog :

Verification Code:

Announce

Share high-quality web security related articles with you:)

Tools

Tag Cloud