[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 05:54:36 +0000
From: Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@...lys.com>
To: "oss-security@...ts.openwall.com" <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: double-free vulnerability in OpenSSH server 9.1 (CVE-2023-25136)
Hi all,
Another quick update on the exploitation of this double-free bug on
OpenBSD:
a/ our previous attack (the arbitrary control of sshd's instruction
pointer via the EVP_AES_KEY structure) works only on OpenBSD amd64, not
on OpenBSD i386;
b/ we were able to recycle the chunk of memory where
options.kex_algorithms was allocated, into a chunk of a different size
(which gives us greater freedom), but this happens with such a low
probability (even on i386) that we do not consider this particular
attack to be practical;
c/ as a direct consequence of CVE-2023-25136, we found an information
leak (of bits and pieces from the memory of the unprivileged sshd
process), but it is unlikely to be useful in practice.
========================================================================
a/ Our previous attack, on OpenBSD i386.
options.kex_algorithms is a 266-byte string, which occupies a 512-byte
chunk of memory. On OpenBSD amd64, we can re-allocate this chunk (after
it is freed for the first time) with a struct EVP_AES_KEY, whose size is
264 bytes and therefore also requires a 512-byte chunk of memory.
But on OpenBSD i386, the size of a struct EVP_AES_KEY is only 252 bytes,
and it therefore requires a 256-byte chunk instead; i.e., we cannot
easily re-allocate options.kex_algorithms's chunk with a struct
EVP_AES_KEY.
========================================================================
b/ The recycling of options.kex_algorithms's chunk.
One solution to the previous problem (on OpenBSD i386) is to recycle
options.kex_algorithms's 512-byte chunk, into a 256-byte chunk; i.e.,
recycle the page of memory where options.kex_algorithms was allocated,
into a page of 256-byte chunks instead. To achieve this:
- options.kex_algorithms must be allocated in an otherwise empty page
of memory (so that, after options.kex_algorithms is freed, this empty
page can be re-used for chunks of a different size). Luckily, because
options.kex_algorithms is allocated randomly from several pages of
memory, this does happen from time to time, with a probability of
~1/512 in our tests.
- This empty page must then be re-used for chunks of a different size,
but sshd enables malloc's "secure" mode (malloc_options = "S"): empty
pages are not cached by malloc but are immediately munmap()ed, and the
re-mmap()ing of a page at the exact same address is therefore subject
to AS(L)R. This happens with a probability of ~1/2^18 at best (unlike
Linux, OpenBSD randomizes every single mmap() address, in a 1GB range
on i386).
- Inside this recycled page, our target chunk must be allocated exactly
where options.kex_algorithms was allocated. For a 256-byte target
chunk, this happens with a probability of 1/16.
As a result, the probability of recycling options.kex_algorithms's chunk
into a 256-byte chunk is ~1/2^31 at best, so we do not consider this
particular attack to be practical.
========================================================================
c/ A useless (?) information leak.
After options.kex_algorithms's chunk is freed for the first time (in
compat_kex_proposal()), sshd enters input_userauth_request():
------------------------------------------------------------------------
250 static int
251 input_userauth_request(int type, u_int32_t seq, struct ssh *ssh)
252 {
...
262 if ((r = sshpkt_get_cstring(ssh, &user, NULL)) != 0 ||
263 (r = sshpkt_get_cstring(ssh, &service, NULL)) != 0 ||
264 (r = sshpkt_get_cstring(ssh, &method, NULL)) != 0)
265 goto out;
...
274 if (authctxt->attempt++ == 0) {
275 /* setup auth context */
276 authctxt->pw = PRIVSEP(getpwnamallow(ssh, user));
...
289 authctxt->user = xstrdup(user);
290 authctxt->service = xstrdup(service);
...
298 } else if (strcmp(user, authctxt->user) != 0 ||
299 strcmp(service, authctxt->service) != 0) {
300 ssh_packet_disconnect(ssh, "Change of username or service "
301 "not allowed: (%s,%s) -> (%s,%s)",
302 authctxt->user, authctxt->service, user, service);
303 }
...
328 out:
329 free(service);
330 free(user);
331 free(method);
332 return r;
333 }
------------------------------------------------------------------------
- at lines 262-264, we re-allocate options.kex_algorithms's chunk with
our user, service, or method string (a 300-byte string, which requires
a 512-byte chunk, just like options.kex_algorithms);
- at line 276, options.kex_algorithms's chunk (now our user, service, or
method string) is freed again;
- at lines 289-290, we re-allocate options.kex_algorithms's chunk again,
with either authctxt->user or authctxt->service (a copy of our user or
service string);
- at lines 329-331, options.kex_algorithms's chunk (now authctxt->user
or authctxt->service) is freed again (via user, service, or method);
- when sshd enters input_userauth_request() for the second time, either
user or service does not match (at lines 298-299), and the contents of
the free authctxt->user or authctxt->service chunk is sent to us (at
lines 300-302).
Initially, we thought that this information leak would not leak any
information at all, because OpenBSD's malloc (when in "secure" mode)
overwrites the contents of free chunks with 0xdf bytes. Nevertheless,
because the authctxt->user or authctxt->service chunk is sent to us as a
null-terminated string (%s), and because this chunk does not contain any
null bytes (only 0xdf bytes), the chunk that follows authctxt->user or
authctxt->service is also sent to us, and might contain interesting
pieces of information (because it can be an allocated chunk).
Our proof of concept (a simple patch for openssh-9.1p1) is attached to
this email. We have not fully analyzed its output yet (disconnect.log),
but we do not expect it to be particularly useful, because of sshd's
defense-in-depth mechanisms:
- the memory of the unprivileged sshd process (where the information
leak occurs) is not supposed to contain any secret information (for
example, the private host keys are scrubbed from the memory of the
unprivileged sshd process as soon as it is fork()ed, in
demote_sensitive_data());
- any leaked memory address is mostly useless (except maybe for its
least significant bits), because sshd calls _exit() at the end of
ssh_packet_disconnect() (at lines 300-302), and because sshd fork()s
and re-execv()s itself (and therefore re-randomizes its address space)
every time it accept()s a new client connection.
As an example, below is an excerpt from a disconnect.log that was
produced when running our proof of concept against an unpatched OpenBSD
7.2 (on amd64):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$ while true ;do ./ssh invalid@....168.56.123 ;done
...
$ hexdump -C disconnect.log
...
000280d0 00 43 68 61 6e 67 65 20 6f 66 20 75 73 65 72 6e |.Change of usern|
000280e0 61 6d 65 20 6f 72 20 73 65 72 76 69 63 65 20 6e |ame or service n|
000280f0 6f 74 20 61 6c 6c 6f 77 65 64 3a 20 28 df df df |ot allowed: (...|
00028100 df df df df df df df df df df df df df df df df |................|
*
000282f0 df df df df df df df df df df df df df 29 4e 90 |.............)N.|
00028300 92 98 14 ff b0 35 d4 f8 f8 59 db 0a ba 43 99 95 |.....5...Y...C..|
00028310 70 6d 2d 2a 5e 85 fe 22 ff 1c 92 19 3b 4e 6d 58 |pm-*^.."....;NmX|
00028320 4b 82 2f bd 97 1e 8c 0d ab 61 4f 76 9b 4b c2 6b |K./......aOv.K.k|
00028330 91 f1 25 c5 5e c2 12 79 d5 a9 56 7f 10 18 e2 71 |..%.^..y..V....q|
00028340 f5 0c c7 9c d0 08 61 82 18 36 66 eb cf af d0 60 |......a..6f....`|
00028350 e9 e0 af 86 5d 07 2c df df df df df df df df df |....].,.........|
00028360 df df df df df df df df df df df df df df df df |................|
...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are at your disposal for questions, comments, and further
discussions. Thank you very much!
With best regards,
--
the Qualys Security Advisory team
View attachment "infoleak.patch" of type "text/plain" (3639 bytes)
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.
