Development discussion of WireGuard
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>,
	 WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: UBSAN: object-size-mismatch in wg_xmit
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 07:53:34 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAH8yC8=mWE=cVdmJU2t8ibDV_O817VT-+BKEGqAZCeabNi0gGw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9q0HMz+nERjoT-TQ8_6bcAFUNVHDEeXQAennUrrifKESw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:24 AM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:14 AM Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Thanks for looking into this.
> >
> > Reading clang docs for ubsan:
> >
> > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.html
> > -fsanitize=object-size: An attempt to potentially use bytes which the
> > optimizer can determine are not part of the object being accessed.
> > This will also detect some types of undefined behavior that may not
> > directly access memory, but are provably incorrect given the size of
> > the objects involved, such as invalid downcasts and calling methods on
> > invalid pointers. These checks are made in terms of
> > __builtin_object_size, and consequently may be able to detect more
> > problems at higher optimization levels.
> >
> > From skimming though your description this seems to fall into
> > "provably incorrect given the size of the objects involved".
> > I guess it's one of these cases which trigger undefined behavior and
> > compiler can e.g. remove all of this code assuming it will be never
> > called at runtime and any branches leading to it will always branch in
> > other directions, or something.
>
> Right that sort of makes sense, and I can imagine that in more general
> cases the struct casting could lead to UB. But what has me scratching
> my head is that syzbot couldn't reproduce. The cast happens every
> time. What about that one time was special? Did the address happen to
> fall on the border of a mapping? Is UBSAN non-deterministic as an
> optimization? Or is there actually some mysterious UaF happening with
> my usage of skbs that I shouldn't overlook?

The object size checker depends upon compiler analysis. If the
compiler can determine the destination buffer size, then the compiler
can insert a call to a safer function, like a safer memcpy.

If the compiler cannot determine the destination buffer size, then the
compiler will not insert a call to a safer function. (And Wireguard
won't see the crash).

Note... The object size checker and use of safer functions when the
compiler can determine destination buffer sizes is quasi-automatic use
of the safer memory functions from TR 24731-1. They are the ones the
Glibc folks refuse to provide to developers.

Jeff

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-01-07 12:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-20 16:54 syzbot
2020-12-20 21:11 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-12-21  9:14   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2020-12-21 11:23     ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2021-01-07 12:22       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-01-07 19:00         ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2021-01-07 19:06           ` Jeffrey Walton
2021-01-08  0:34             ` Corey Costello
2021-01-08  0:42               ` Eric Light
2021-01-08  0:44                 ` Corey Costello
2021-01-08  0:50                   ` Eric Light
2021-01-08  1:02                 ` Phillip McMahon
2021-01-08  9:33             ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-01-08 20:54               ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-01-08  9:30           ` Dmitry Vyukov
     [not found]             ` <CAGXu5j+jzmkiU_AWoTVF6e263iYSSJYUHB=Kdqh-MCfEO-aNSg@mail.gmail.com>
2021-01-09  9:46               ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-01-09 10:49                 ` Matthias Urlichs
2021-01-11 17:17                 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-01-11 17:35                   ` Jeffrey Walton
2021-01-11 17:58                     ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-01-11 18:14                       ` Jeffrey Walton
2021-01-12  9:54                         ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-01-07 12:53       ` Jeffrey Walton [this message]
2021-01-07 17:01       ` Julian Wiedmann
2021-01-07 18:58         ` Jason A. Donenfeld

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAH8yC8=mWE=cVdmJU2t8ibDV_O817VT-+BKEGqAZCeabNi0gGw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=noloader@gmail.com \
    --cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).