From: "Jordan Justen" <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>,
Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>,
edk2-devel-groups-io <devel@edk2.groups.io>
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 02/10] MdePkg/PiFirmwareFile: fix undefined behavior in SECTION_SIZE
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 02:04:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <155540548458.13612.11281694046292591090@jljusten-skl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3bbbb85e-5557-d99b-1c3b-50a844455d20@redhat.com>
On 2019-04-15 09:15:31, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 04/14/19 09:19, Jordan Justen wrote:
> > On 2019-04-12 16:31:20, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> >> RH covscan justifiedly reports that accessing
> >> "EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER.Size", which is of type UINT8[3], through a
> >> (UINT32*), is undefined behavior:
> >>
> >>> Error: OVERRUN (CWE-119):
> >>> edk2-89910a39dcfd/OvmfPkg/Sec/SecMain.c:178: overrun-local: Overrunning
> >>> array of 3 bytes at byte offset 3 by dereferencing pointer
> >>> "(UINT32 *)((EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER *)(UINTN)Section)->Size".
> >>> # 176| Section = (EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER*)(UINTN) CurrentAddress;
> >>> # 177|
> >>> # 178|-> Size = SECTION_SIZE (Section);
> >>> # 179| if (Size < sizeof (*Section)) {
> >>> # 180| return EFI_VOLUME_CORRUPTED;
> >>
> >> Fix this by introducing EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER_UNION, and expressing
> >> SECTION_SIZE() in terms of "EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER_UNION.Uint32".
> >>
> >> Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
> >> Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> >> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1710
> >> Issue: scan-1007.txt
> >> Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >> MdePkg/Include/Pi/PiFirmwareFile.h | 10 +++++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/MdePkg/Include/Pi/PiFirmwareFile.h b/MdePkg/Include/Pi/PiFirmwareFile.h
> >> index a9f3bcc4eb8e..4fce8298d1c0 100644
> >> --- a/MdePkg/Include/Pi/PiFirmwareFile.h
> >> +++ b/MdePkg/Include/Pi/PiFirmwareFile.h
> >> @@ -229,16 +229,24 @@ typedef struct {
> >> ///
> >> UINT8 Size[3];
> >> EFI_SECTION_TYPE Type;
> >> ///
> >> /// Declares the section type.
> >> ///
> >> } EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER;
> >>
> >> +///
> >> +/// Union that permits accessing EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER as a UINT32 object.
> >> +///
> >> +typedef union {
> >> + EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER Hdr;
> >> + UINT32 Uint32;
> >> +} EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER_UNION;
> >> +
> >> typedef struct {
> >> ///
> >> /// A 24-bit unsigned integer that contains the total size of the section in bytes,
> >> /// including the EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER.
> >> ///
> >> UINT8 Size[3];
> >>
> >> EFI_SECTION_TYPE Type;
> >> @@ -476,17 +484,17 @@ typedef struct {
> >> /// A UINT16 that represents a particular build. Subsequent builds have monotonically
> >> /// increasing build numbers relative to earlier builds.
> >> ///
> >> UINT16 BuildNumber;
> >> CHAR16 VersionString[1];
> >> } EFI_VERSION_SECTION2;
> >>
> >> #define SECTION_SIZE(SectionHeaderPtr) \
> >> - ((UINT32) (*((UINT32 *) ((EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER *) (UINTN) SectionHeaderPtr)->Size) & 0x00ffffff))
> >> + (((EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER_UNION *) (UINTN) (SectionHeaderPtr))->Uint32 & 0x00ffffff)
> >
> > Mike, all,
> >
> > Can we add a typedef for EFI_COMMON_SECTION_HEADER_UNION if it's not
> > in the PI spec?
> >
> > If it's not allowed, I think something like this might work too:
> >
> > #define SECTION_SIZE(SectionHeaderPtr) \
> > (*((UINT32*)(UINTN)(SectionHeaderPtr)) & 0x00ffffff)
>
> (Less importantly:)
>
> It might shut up the static analyzer, but regarding the C standard, it's
> equally undefined behavior.
I think you are still accessing it through a UINT32*, since you are
using a pointer to a union, and an field of type UINT32 within the
union.
I guess it might more well defined to shift the bytes, like is
sometimes done with the FFS file sizes.
-Jordan
> Anyway I don't feel too strongly about this, given that we disable the
> strict aliasing / effective type rules in "tools_def.template"
> ("-fno-strict-aliasing").
>
> > Then again, I see SECTION_SIZE is not in the spec, so maybe it's ok to
> > add the typedef.
>
> (More importantly:)
>
> Indeed the doubt you voice about ..._UNION crossed my mind, but then I
> too searched the PI spec for SECTION_SIZE, with no hits.
>
> Beyond that, I searched both the PI and UEFI specs, for "_UNION" --
> again no hits, despite our definitions of:
>
> - EFI_IMAGE_OPTIONAL_HEADER_UNION
> - EFI_GRAPHICS_OUTPUT_BLT_PIXEL_UNION
>
> in
>
> - "MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/PeImage.h"
> - "MdePkg/Include/Protocol/GraphicsOutput.h"
>
> respectively.
>
> Thanks,
> Laszlo
>
> >
> > -Jordan
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-16 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-12 23:31 [PATCH 00/10] patches for some warnings raised by "RH covscan" Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 01/10] MdePkg/PiFirmwareFile: express IS_SECTION2 in terms of SECTION_SIZE Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-15 17:01 ` [edk2-devel] " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 02/10] MdePkg/PiFirmwareFile: fix undefined behavior in SECTION_SIZE Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-14 7:19 ` [edk2-devel] " Jordan Justen
2019-04-15 16:15 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-16 8:28 ` Liming Gao
2019-04-16 9:04 ` Jordan Justen [this message]
2019-04-16 10:59 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-16 16:50 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-17 10:08 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-16 18:48 ` Jordan Justen
2019-04-16 23:25 ` Andrew Fish
2019-04-17 10:29 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-17 11:44 ` Andrew Fish
2019-04-17 14:59 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-17 19:35 ` Jordan Justen
2019-04-18 9:38 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-18 15:18 ` Liming Gao
2019-04-17 10:01 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 03/10] BaseTools/PiFirmwareFile: " Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 04/10] MdePkg/PiFirmwareFile: fix undefined behavior in FFS_FILE_SIZE Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-15 17:23 ` [edk2-devel] " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-17 17:52 ` Michael D Kinney
2019-04-17 18:31 ` Michael D Kinney
2019-04-18 9:06 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-17 18:31 ` Andrew Fish
2019-04-17 18:36 ` Michael D Kinney
2019-04-18 8:48 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-18 8:45 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-18 23:12 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-18 17:20 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-18 17:59 ` Michael D Kinney
2019-04-18 18:12 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 05/10] OvmfPkg/Sec: fix out-of-bounds reads Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-15 17:24 ` [edk2-devel] " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 06/10] OvmfPkg/QemuVideoDxe: avoid arithmetic on null pointer Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 07/10] OvmfPkg/AcpiPlatformDxe: suppress invalid "deref of undef pointer" warning Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-15 17:26 ` [edk2-devel] " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 08/10] OvmfPkg: suppress "Value stored to ... is never read" analyzer warnings Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-14 8:03 ` [edk2-devel] " Jordan Justen
2019-04-15 16:25 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-16 9:26 ` Jordan Justen
2019-04-16 11:44 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 09/10] OvmfPkg/AcpiPlatformDxe: catch theoretical nullptr deref in Xen code Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-15 17:28 ` [edk2-devel] " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 10/10] OvmfPkg/BasePciCapLib: suppress invalid "nullptr deref" warning Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-15 17:31 ` [edk2-devel] " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-04-16 11:01 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-12 23:36 ` [PATCH 00/10] patches for some warnings raised by "RH covscan" Ard Biesheuvel
2019-04-15 16:16 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-18 14:20 ` [edk2-devel] " Laszlo Ersek
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-list 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=155540548458.13612.11281694046292591090@jljusten-skl \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/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