[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:11:03 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Address Sanitizer local root
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:03:59PM -0500, Daniel Micay wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-02-17 at 17:24 -0800, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> > Sadly MPX is too slow, too memory-hungry, and does not protect from
> > use-after-free at all.
>
> MPX is definitely problematic (performance, memory usage, false
> positives with some atomic data structures, false positives without
> using it everywhere - essentially a new ABI) but I don't think the lack
> of coverage for lifetime issues is a major issue.
>
> The malloc implementation can do a good job at mitigating lifetime
> issues though. It can't detect 100% of UAF issues, but it can force
> usage of pointers to fault (via proper junk filling) and detect write
> after free via a comparable quarantine technique + validating that the
> junk data is unaltered when allocations leave the quarantine. It can be
> just as good at detecting double-free.
>
> See the follow-up email:
>
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/02/18/3
>
> It's extremely painful to actually debug the aborts and faults produced
> from this kind of hardening, so it doesn't really displace ASan at all
> even for the bits where it can be as reliable, and it doesn't cover the
> read-after-free case in the same way.
As long as the aborts/faults happen at the earliest point where the
wrong program behavior can be detected, I see no way they are "more
painful to debug" than having ASan or similar introspectively print
crash info. Attaching a debugger should get you equally useful
information.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
