ExternalVendorCode/crosstool-ng
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng.git synced 2024-12-25 15:31:05 +00:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
4773bd609c
crosstool-ng/packages/gcc/8.5.0/0032-aarch64-Make-stack-smash-canary-protect-saved-regist.patch

260 lines
8.1 KiB
Diff
Raw Blame History

From ee9111b567ddcd2f1b16da4f38b69b1b979df9ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 19:16:52 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 32/32] aarch64: Make stack smash canary protect saved
registers
AArch64 normally puts the saved registers near the bottom of the frame,
immediately above any dynamic allocations. But this means that a
stack-smash attack on those dynamic allocations could overwrite the
saved registers without needing to reach as far as the stack smash
canary.
The same thing could also happen for variable-sized arguments that are
passed by value, since those are allocated before a call and popped on
return.
This patch avoids that by putting the locals (and thus the canary) below
the saved registers when stack smash protection is active.
The patch fixes CVE-2023-4039.
gcc/
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_save_regs_above_locals_p):
New function.
(aarch64_layout_frame): Use it to decide whether locals should
go above or below the saved registers.
(aarch64_expand_prologue): Update stack layout comment.
Emit a stack tie after the final adjustment.
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-8.c: New test.
* gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-9.c: Likewise.
---
gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c | 46 ++++++++++++--
.../gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-8.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++
.../gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-9.c | 33 ++++++++++
3 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-8.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-9.c
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
index 861e928ebdc2..5c0e3fd484da 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
@@ -4078,6 +4078,20 @@ aarch64_output_probe_stack_range (rtx reg1, rtx reg2)
return "";
}
+/* Return true if the current function should save registers above
+ the locals area, rather than below it. */
+
+static bool
+aarch64_save_regs_above_locals_p ()
+{
+ /* When using stack smash protection, make sure that the canary slot
+ comes between the locals and the saved registers. Otherwise,
+ it would be possible for a carefully sized smash attack to change
+ the saved registers (particularly LR and FP) without reaching the
+ canary. */
+ return crtl->stack_protect_guard;
+}
+
/* Mark the registers that need to be saved by the callee and calculate
the size of the callee-saved registers area and frame record (both FP
and LR may be omitted). */
@@ -4138,6 +4152,16 @@ aarch64_layout_frame (void)
cfun->machine->frame.bytes_below_hard_fp = crtl->outgoing_args_size;
+ bool regs_at_top_p = aarch64_save_regs_above_locals_p ();
+
+ if (regs_at_top_p)
+ {
+ cfun->machine->frame.bytes_below_hard_fp += get_frame_size ();
+ cfun->machine->frame.bytes_below_hard_fp
+ = aligned_upper_bound (cfun->machine->frame.bytes_below_hard_fp,
+ STACK_BOUNDARY / BITS_PER_UNIT);
+ }
+
if (cfun->machine->frame.emit_frame_chain)
{
/* FP and LR are placed in the linkage record. */
@@ -4191,9 +4215,11 @@ aarch64_layout_frame (void)
HOST_WIDE_INT varargs_and_saved_regs_size
= offset + cfun->machine->frame.saved_varargs_size;
+ cfun->machine->frame.bytes_above_hard_fp = varargs_and_saved_regs_size;
+ if (!regs_at_top_p)
+ cfun->machine->frame.bytes_above_hard_fp += get_frame_size ();
cfun->machine->frame.bytes_above_hard_fp
- = aligned_upper_bound (varargs_and_saved_regs_size
- + get_frame_size (),
+ = aligned_upper_bound (cfun->machine->frame.bytes_above_hard_fp,
STACK_BOUNDARY / BITS_PER_UNIT);
/* Both these values are already aligned. */
@@ -4205,6 +4231,9 @@ aarch64_layout_frame (void)
cfun->machine->frame.bytes_above_locals
= cfun->machine->frame.saved_varargs_size;
+ if (regs_at_top_p)
+ cfun->machine->frame.bytes_above_locals
+ += cfun->machine->frame.saved_regs_size;
cfun->machine->frame.initial_adjust = 0;
cfun->machine->frame.final_adjust = 0;
@@ -4912,10 +4941,10 @@ aarch64_add_cfa_expression (rtx_insn *insn, unsigned int reg,
| for register varargs |
| |
+-------------------------------+
- | local variables | <-- frame_pointer_rtx
+ | local variables (1) | <-- frame_pointer_rtx
| |
+-------------------------------+
- | padding0 | \
+ | padding (1) | \
+-------------------------------+ |
| callee-saved registers | | frame.saved_regs_size
+-------------------------------+ |
@@ -4923,6 +4952,10 @@ aarch64_add_cfa_expression (rtx_insn *insn, unsigned int reg,
+-------------------------------+ |
| FP' | / <- hard_frame_pointer_rtx (aligned)
+-------------------------------+
+ | local variables (2) |
+ +-------------------------------+
+ | padding (2) |
+ +-------------------------------+
| dynamic allocation |
+-------------------------------+
| padding |
@@ -4932,6 +4965,9 @@ aarch64_add_cfa_expression (rtx_insn *insn, unsigned int reg,
+-------------------------------+
| | <-- stack_pointer_rtx (aligned)
+ The regions marked (1) and (2) are mutually exclusive. (2) is used
+ when aarch64_save_regs_above_locals_p is true.
+
Dynamic stack allocations via alloca() decrease stack_pointer_rtx
but leave frame_pointer_rtx and hard_frame_pointer_rtx
unchanged. */
@@ -5042,6 +5078,8 @@ aarch64_expand_prologue (void)
aarch64_save_callee_saves (DFmode, callee_offset, V0_REGNUM, V31_REGNUM,
callee_adjust != 0 || emit_frame_chain);
aarch64_sub_sp (ip1_rtx, ip0_rtx, final_adjust, !frame_pointer_needed);
+ if (emit_frame_chain && maybe_ne (final_adjust, 0))
+ emit_insn (gen_stack_tie (stack_pointer_rtx, hard_frame_pointer_rtx));
}
/* Return TRUE if we can use a simple_return insn.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-8.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..b808735762fd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-8.c
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+/* { dg-options " -O -fstack-protector-strong" } */
+/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" } } */
+
+void g(void *);
+
+/*
+** test1:
+** sub sp, sp, #304
+** stp x29, x30, \[sp, #?272\]
+** add x29, sp, #?272
+** str (x[0-9]+), \[sp, #?288\]
+** ...
+** ldr (x[0-9]+), \[\1\]
+** str \2, \[sp, #?264\]
+** mov \2, *0
+** add x0, sp, #?8
+** bl g
+** ...
+** ldr x[0-9]+, \[\1\]
+** ...
+** bne .*
+** ...
+** ldr \1, \[sp, #?288\]
+** ldp x29, x30, \[sp, #?272\]
+** add sp, sp, #?304
+** ret
+** bl __stack_chk_fail
+*/
+int test1() {
+ int y[0x40];
+ g(y);
+ return 1;
+}
+
+/*
+** test2:
+** stp x29, x30, \[sp, #?-32\]!
+** mov x29, sp
+** str (x[0-9]+), \[sp, #?16\]
+** sub sp, sp, #1040
+** ...
+** ldr (x[0-9]+), \[\1\]
+** str \2, \[sp, #?1032\]
+** mov \2, *0
+** add x0, sp, #?8
+** bl g
+** ...
+** ldr x[0-9]+, \[\1\]
+** ...
+** bne .*
+** ...
+** add sp, sp, #?1040
+** ldr \1, \[sp, #?16\]
+** ldp x29, x30, \[sp\], #?32
+** ret
+** bl __stack_chk_fail
+*/
+int test2() {
+ int y[0x100];
+ g(y);
+ return 1;
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-9.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-9.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..58f322aa480a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-9.c
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -fstack-protector-all" } */
+/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" } } */
+
+/*
+** main:
+** ...
+** stp x29, x30, \[sp, #?-[0-9]+\]!
+** ...
+** sub sp, sp, #[0-9]+
+** ...
+** str x[0-9]+, \[x29, #?-8\]
+** ...
+*/
+int f(const char *);
+void g(void *);
+int main(int argc, char* argv[])
+{
+ int a;
+ int b;
+ char c[2+f(argv[1])];
+ int d[0x100];
+ char y;
+
+ y=42; a=4; b=10;
+ c[0] = 'h'; c[1] = '\0';
+
+ c[f(argv[2])] = '\0';
+
+ __builtin_printf("%d %d\n%s\n", a, b, c);
+ g(d);
+
+ return 0;
+}
--
2.42.0
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink