_sre: avoid relying on pointer overflow

[NickolaiZeldovich]

BPO	17016
Nosy	@mdickinson, @vstinner, @ezio-melotti, @serhiy-storchaka
Files	pp.patch: Proposed patch for _sre.c pp-2.patch pp-3.patch

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = 'https://github.com/serhiy-storchaka'
closed_at = <Date 2013-04-13.20:48:30.420>
created_at = <Date 2013-01-22.15:54:28.408>
labels = ['type-security', 'extension-modules', 'expert-regex']
title = '_sre: avoid relying on pointer overflow'
updated_at = <Date 2013-10-31.15:03:20.570>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/NickolaiZeldovich'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2013-10-31.15:03:20.570>
actor = 'vstinner'
assignee = 'serhiy.storchaka'
closed = True
closed_date = <Date 2013-04-13.20:48:30.420>
closer = 'serhiy.storchaka'
components = ['Extension Modules', 'Regular Expressions']
creation = <Date 2013-01-22.15:54:28.408>
creator = 'Nickolai.Zeldovich'
dependencies = []
files = ['28804', '29368', '29379']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 17016
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 14.0
messages = ['180403', '180411', '180443', '180473', '180484', '180485', '182231', '183891', '183959', '183960', '183965', '184184', '186778', '186840']
nosy_count = 7.0
nosy_names = ['mark.dickinson', 'vstinner', 'ezio.melotti', 'mrabarnett', 'python-dev', 'serhiy.storchaka', 'Nickolai.Zeldovich']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'fixed'
stage = 'resolved'
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = 'security'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue17016'
versions = ['Python 2.7', 'Python 3.3', 'Python 3.4']

[NickolaiZeldovich]

Modules/_sre.c relies on pointer overflow in 5 places to check that the supplied offset does not cause wraparound when added to a base pointer; e.g.:

                SRE_CODE prefix_len;
                GET_ARG; prefix_len = arg;
                GET_ARG;
                /* Here comes the prefix string */
                if (code+prefix_len < code || code+prefix_len > newcode)
                    FAIL;

however, pointer wraparound is undefined behavior in C, and gcc will optimize away (code+prefix_len < code) to (true), since prefix_len is an unsigned value. This will happen with -O2 and even with -fwrapv:

nickolai@sahara:/tmp$ cat x.c
void bar();

void
foo(int *p, unsigned int x)
{
  if (p + x < p)
    bar();
}
nickolai@sahara:/tmp$ gcc x.c -S -o - -O2 -fwrapv
...
foo:
.LFB0:
	.cfi_startproc
	rep
	ret
	.cfi_endproc
...
nickolai@sahara:/tmp$ 

On a 32-bit platform with the development version of cpython, prefix_len seems to end up being an 'unsigned int', so I suspect that supplying a large prefix_len value (perhaps 0xffffffff) could lead to the subsequent loop writing garbage all over memory, or worse (but I have not tried to construct a concrete input that triggers this bug, so maybe there are some checks that make it difficult to trigger the bug).

In any case, this might be worth fixing -- the attached patch provides one proposed fix. Another option might be to add -fno-strict-overflow to the gcc flags, which may be a reasonable additional measure to take, to avoid such problems biting Python in the future, but I would suggest doing this in addition to fixing the code (since not all compilers support such a flag to disable certain optimizations).

[serhiy-storchaka]

LGTM.

There are other doubtful places, at lines: 658, 678, 1000, 1084, 2777, 3111.

[mrabarnett]

Lines 1000 and 1084 will be a problem only if you're near the top of the address space. This is because:

1. ctx->pattern[1] will always be <= ctx->pattern[2].

2. A value of 65535 in ctx->pattern[2] means unlimited, even though SRE_CODE is now UCS4.

See also issue bpo-13169.

If the 'unlimited' value is raised then fixing those lines will become more urgent.

[NickolaiZeldovich]

Lines 2777 and 3111 do indeed look suspect, because gcc can compile (ptr + offset < ptr) into (offset < 0):

nickolai@sahara:/tmp$ cat x.c 
void bar();

void
foo(char* ptr, int offset)
{
  if (ptr + offset < ptr)
    bar();
}
nickolai@sahara:/tmp$ gcc x.c -S -o - -O2
...
foo:
.LFB0:
	.cfi_startproc
	testl	%esi, %esi
	js	.L4
	rep
	ret
	.p2align 4,,10
	.p2align 3
.L4:
	xorl	%eax, %eax
	jmp	bar
	.cfi_endproc
...
nickolai@sahara:/tmp$ 

Lines 658, 678, 1000, 1084 are potentially problematic -- I don't know of current compilers that will do something unexpected, but it might be worth rewriting the code to avoid undefined behavior anyway.

[mrabarnett]

You're checking "int offset", but what happens with "unsigned int offset"?

[NickolaiZeldovich]

For an unsigned int offset, see my original bug report: gcc eliminates the check altogether, since offset >= 0 by definition.

[serhiy-storchaka]

Nickolai, are you want to update your patch with fixes for other possible pointer overflows? Note, that the maximal repetition number has been increased now.

[NickolaiZeldovich]

Sorry for the delay. Attached is an updated patch that should fix all of the issues mentioned in this bug report.

[serhiy-storchaka]

Nickolai, can you please submit a contributor form?

http://python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/
http://python.org/psf/contrib/

[NickolaiZeldovich]

I just submitted the contributor form -- thanks for the reminder.

[NickolaiZeldovich]

I get an HTTP error when trying to upload another patch through Rietveld, so here's a revised patch that avoids the need for Py_uintptr_t (thanks Serhiy).

[serhiy-storchaka]

Of course it would be nice to have the tests for so much cases as possible, but I am afraid that it will not be easy. The patch LGTM.

[python-dev]

New changeset 27162465316f by Serhiy Storchaka in branch '2.7':
Issue bpo-17016: Get rid of possible pointer wraparounds and integer overflows
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/27162465316f

New changeset 2673d207c524 by Serhiy Storchaka in branch '3.3':
Issue bpo-17016: Get rid of possible pointer wraparounds and integer overflows
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/2673d207c524

New changeset f280786d0e64 by Serhiy Storchaka in branch 'default':
Issue bpo-17016: Get rid of possible pointer wraparounds and integer overflows
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/f280786d0e64

[serhiy-storchaka]

Thank you, Nickolai, for the patch.