Fuzzing Image Parsing in Windows, Part Two: Uninitialized MemoryContinuing our discussion of href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/blog/threat-research/2020/09/fuzzing-image-parsing-in-windows-color-profiles.html">image
parsing vulnerabilities in Windows, we take a look at a
comparatively less popular vulnerability class: uninitialized memory.
In this post, we will look at Windows’ inbuilt image
parsers—specifically for vulnerabilities involving the use of
uninitialized memory.
The Vulnerability: Uninitialized Memory
In unmanaged languages, such as C or C++, variables are not
initialized by default. Using uninitialized variables causes undefined
behavior and may cause a crash. There are roughly two variants of
uninitialized memory:
- Direct uninitialized memory usage: An uninitialized pointer or
an index is used in read or write. This may cause a crash.
- Information leakage (info leak) through usage of uninitialized
memory: Uninitialized memory content is accessible across a security
boundary. An example: an uninitialized kernel buffer accessible from
user mode, leading to information disclosure.
In this post we will be looking closely at the second variant in
Windows image parsers, which will lead to information disclosure in
situations such as web browsers where an attacker can read the decoded
image back using JavaScript.
Detecting Uninitialized Memory Vulnerabilities
Compared to memory corruption vulnerabilities such as heap overflow
and use-after-free, uninitialized memory vulnerabilities on their own
do not access memory out of bound or out of scope. This makes
detection of these vulnerabilities slightly more complicated than
memory corruption vulnerabilities. While direct uninitialized memory
usage can cause a crash and can be detected, information leakage
doesn’t usually cause any crashes. Detecting it requires compiler
instrumentations such as MemorySanitizer or binary
instrumentation/recompilation tools such as Valgrind.
Detour: Detecting Uninitialized Memory in Linux
Let's take a little detour and look at detecting uninitialized
memory in Linux and compare with Windows’ built-in capabilities. Even
though compilers warn about some uninitialized variables, most of the
complicated cases of uninitialized memory usage are not detected at
compile time. For this, we can use a run-time detection mechanism.
MemorySanitizer is a compiler instrumentation for both GCC and Clang,
which detects uninitialized memory reads. A sample of how it works is
given in Figure 1.
$ cat sample.cc
#include
<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int *arr =
new int[10];
if(arr[3] == 0)
{
printf("Yay!\n");
}
printf("%08x\n", arr[3]);
return
0;
}
$ clang++ -fsanitize=memory
-fno-omit-frame-pointer -g sample.cc
$ ./a.out
==29745==WARNING:
MemorySanitizer: use-of-uninitialized-value
#0
0x496db8 (/home/dan/uni/a.out+0x496db8)
#1
0x7f463c5f1bf6
(/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x21bf6)
#2
0x41ad69 (/home/dan/uni/a.out+0x41ad69)
SUMMARY: MemorySanitizer:
use-of-uninitialized-value
(/home/dan/uni/a.out+0x496db8)
Exiting
|
Figure 1: MemorySanitizer detection of
uninitialized memory
Similarly, Valgrind can also be used to detect uninitialized memory
during run-time.
Detecting Uninitialized Memory in Windows
Compared to Linux, Windows lacks any built-in mechanism for
detecting uninitialized memory usage. While Visual Studio and Clang-cl
recently introduced href="https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/addresssanitizer-asan-for-windows-with-msvc/">AddressSanitizer
support, MemorySanitizer and other sanitizers are not implemented
as of this writing.
Some of the useful tools in Windows to detect memory corruption
vulnerabilities such as href="https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/debugger/gflags-and-pageheap">PageHeap
do not help in detecting uninitialized memory. On the contrary,
PageHeap fills the memory allocations with patterns, which essentially
makes them initialized.
There are few third-party tools, including Dr.Memory, that use
binary instrumentation to detect memory safety issues such as heap
overflows, uninitialized memory usages, use-after-frees, and others.
Detecting Uninitialized Memory in Image Decoding
Detecting uninitialized memory in Windows usually requires binary
instrumentation, especially when we do not have access to source code.
One of the indicators we can use to detect uninitialized memory usage,
specifically in the case of image decoding, is the resulting pixels
after the image is decoded.
When an image is decoded, it results in a set of raw pixels. If
image decoding uses any uninitialized memory, some or all of the
pixels may end up as random. In simpler words, decoding an image
multiple times may result in different output each time if
uninitialized memory is used. This difference of output can be used to
detect uninitialized memory and aid writing a fuzzing harness
targeting Windows image decoders. An example fuzzing harness is
presented in Figure 2.
#define ROUNDS 20
unsigned char* DecodeImage(char
*imagePath)
{
unsigned char *pixels =
NULL;
// use GDI or WIC to decode image and
get the resulting pixels
...
...
return pixels;
}
void Fuzz(char *imagePath)
{
unsigned char *refPixels = DecodeImage(imagePath);
if(refPixels != NULL)
{
for(int i = 0; i < ROUNDS;
i++)
{
unsigned
char *currPixels = DecodeImage(imagePath);
if(!ComparePixels(refPixels, currPixels))
{
// the
reference pixels and current pixels don't match
// crash now to let the fuzzer know of
this file
CrashProgram();
}
free(currPixels);
}
free(refPixels);
}
}
|
Figure 2: Diff harness
The idea behind this fuzzing harness is not entirely new;
previously, href="https://lcamtuf.blogspot.com/2014/09/cve-2014-1564-uninitialized-memory-when.html">lcamtuf
used a similar idea to detect uninitialized memory in open-source
image parsers and used a web page to display the pixel differences.
Fuzzing
With the diffing harness ready, one can proceed to look for the
supported image formats and gather corpuses. Gathering image files for
corpus is considerably easy given the near unlimited availability on
the internet, but at the same time it is harder to find good corpuses
among millions of files with unique code coverage. Code coverage
information for Windows image parsing is tracked from WindowsCodecs.dll.
Note that unlike regular Windows fuzzing, we will not be enabling
PageHeap this time as PageHeap “initializes” the heap allocations with patterns.
Results
During my research, I found three cases of uninitialized memory
usage while fuzzing Windows built-in image parsers. Two of them are
explained in detail in the next sections. Root cause analysis of
uninitialized memory usage is non-trivial. We don’t have a crash
location to back trace, and have to use the resulting pixel buffer to
back trace to find the root cause—or use clever tricks to find the deviation.
CVE-2020-0853
Let’s look at the rendering of the proof of concept (PoC) file
before going into the root cause of this vulnerability. For this we
will use lcamtuf’s HTML, which loads the PoC image multiple times and
compares the pixels with reference pixels.
src="https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/images/fuzzing-image2/fig3.png" alt="" />
Figure 3: CVE-2020-0853
As we can see from the resulting images (Figure 3), the output
varies drastically in each decoding and we can assume this PoC leaks a
lot of uninitialized memory.
To identify the root cause of these vulnerabilities, I used Time
Travel Debugging (TTD) extensively. Tracing back the execution and
keeping track of the memory address is a tedious task, but TTD makes
it only slightly less painful by keeping the addresses and values
constant and providing unlimited forward and backward executions.
After spending quite a bit of time debugging the trace, I found the
source of uninitialized memory in class="code">windowscodecs!CFormatConverter::Initialize. Even
though the source was found, it was not initially clear why this
memory ends up in the calculation of pixels without getting
overwritten at all. To solve this mystery, additional debugging was
done by comparing PoC execution trace against a normal TIFF file
decoding. The following section shows the allocation, copying of
uninitialized value to pixel calculation and the actual root cause of
the vulnerability.
Allocation and Use of Uninitialized Memory
windowscodecs!CFormatConverter::Initialize
allocates 0x40 bytes of memory, as shown in Figure 4.
0:000> r
rax=0000000000000000
rbx=0000000000000040 rcx=0000000000000040
rdx=0000000000000008 rsi=000002257a3db448
rdi=0000000000000000
rip=00007ffaf047a238
rsp=000000ad23f6f7c0 rbp=000000ad23f6f841
r8=000000ad23f6f890 r9=0000000000000010
r10=000002257a3db468
r11=000000ad23f6f940
r12=000000000000000e r13=000002257a3db040
r14=000002257a3dbf60 r15=0000000000000000
iopl=0 nv up ei pl zr na po nc
cs=0033
ss=002b ds=002b es=002b fs=0053 gs=002b
efl=00000246
windowscodecs!CFormatConverter::Initialize+0x1c8:
00007ffa`f047a238 ff15ea081200 call qword ptr
[windowscodecs!_imp_malloc (00007ffa`f059ab28)]
ds:00007ffa`f059ab28={msvcrt!malloc
(00007ffa`f70e9d30)}
0:000> k
#
Child-SP RetAddr Call Site
00
000000ad`23f6f7c0 00007ffa`f047c5fb
windowscodecs!CFormatConverter::Initialize+0x1c8
01
000000ad`23f6f890 00007ffa`f047c2f3
windowscodecs!CFormatConverter::Initialize+0x12b
02
000000ad`23f6f980 00007ff6`34ca6dff
windowscodecs!CFormatConverterResolver::Initialize+0x273
//Uninitialized memory after
allocation:
0:000> db @rax
00000225`7a3dbf70 d0 b0 3d 7a 25 02 00 00-60 24 3d 7a 25 02
00 00 ..=z%...`$=z%...
00000225`7a3dbf80 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00-00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
................
00000225`7a3dbf90 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00-00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00000225`7a3dbfa0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00-00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 ................
00000225`7a3dbfb0 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00-00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
................
00000225`7a3dbfc0 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00-64 51 7c 26 c3 2c 01 03 ........dQ|&.,..
00000225`7a3dbfd0 f0 00 2f 6b 25 02 00 00-f0 00 2f 6b 25 02
00 00 ../k%...../k%...
00000225`7a3dbfe0 60 00 3d
7a 25 02 00 00-60 00 3d 7a 25 02 00 00
`.=z%...`.=z%...
|
Figure 4: Allocation of memory
The memory never gets written and the uninitialized values are
inverted in class="code">windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrProcessCopy
and further processed in class="code">windowscodecs!GammaConvert_16bppGrayInt_128bppRGBA
and in later called scaling functions.
As there is no read or write into uninitialized memory before
HrProcessCopy, I traced the execution back from HrProcessCopy and
compared the execution traces with a normal tiff decoding trace. A
difference was found in the way class="code">windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::UnpackLine
behaved with the PoC file compared to a normal TIFF file, and one of
the function parameters in UnpackLine was a
pointer to the uninitialized buffer.
The UnpackLine function has a series of
switch-case statements working with bits per sample (BPS) of TIFF
images. In our PoC TIFF file, the BPS value is 0x09—which is not
supported by UnpackLine—and the control flow
never reaches a code path that writes to the buffer. This is the root
cause of the uninitialized memory, which gets processed further down
the pipeline and finally shown as pixel data.
Patch
After presenting my analysis to Microsoft, they decided to patch the
vulnerability by making the files with unsupported BPS values as
invalid. This avoids all decoding and rejects the file in the very
early phase of its loading.
CVE-2020-1397
src="https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/images/fuzzing-image2/fig5.png" alt="" />
Figure 5: Rendering of CVE-2020-1397
Unlike the previous vulnerability, the difference in the output is
quite limited in this one, as seen in Figure 5. One of the simpler
root cause analysis techniques that can be used to figure out a
specific type of uninitialized memory usage is comparing execution
traces of runs that produce two different outputs. This specific
technique can be helpful when an uninitialized variable causes a
control flow change in the program and that causes a difference in the
outputs. For this, a binary instrumentation script was written, which
logged all the instructions executed along with its registers and
accessed memory values.
Diffing two distinct execution traces by comparing the instruction
pointer (RIP) value, I found a control flow change in class="code">windowscodecs!CCCITT::Expand2DLine due to a usage
of an uninitialized value. Back tracing the uninitialized value using
TTD trace was exceptionally useful for finding the root cause. The
following section shows the allocation, population and use of the
uninitialized value, which leads to the control flow change and
deviance in the pixel outputs.
Allocation
windowscodecs!TIFFReadBufferSetup allocates
0x400 bytes of memory, as shown in Figure 6.
windowscodecs!TIFFReadBufferSetup:
...
allocBuff = malloc(size);
*(v3 +
16) |= 0x200u;
*(v3 + 480) =
allocBuff;
0:000> k
# Child-SP
RetAddr Call Site
00 000000aa`a654f128
00007ff9`4404d4f3 windowscodecs!TIFFReadBufferSetup
01 000000aa`a654f130 00007ff9`4404d3c9
windowscodecs!TIFFFillStrip+0xab
02 000000aa`a654f170
00007ff9`4404d2dc
windowscodecs!TIFFReadEncodedStrip+0x91
03
000000aa`a654f1b0 00007ff9`440396dd
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::ReadStrip+0x74
04
000000aa`a654f1e0 00007ff9`44115fca
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::GetOneUnpackedLine+0x1ad
05 000000aa`a654f2b0 00007ff9`44077400
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrProcessCopy+0x4a
06 000000aa`a654f2f0 00007ff9`44048dbb
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrReadScanline+0x20
07 000000aa`a654f320 00007ff9`44048b40
windowscodecs!CDecoderBase::CopyPixels+0x23b
08
000000aa`a654f3d0 00007ff9`44043c95
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::CopyPixels+0x80
09
000000aa`a654f4d0 00007ff9`4404563b
windowscodecs!CDecoderFrame::CopyPixels+0xb5
After allocation:
0:000> !heap -p
-a @rax
address 0000029744382140 found in
_HEAP @ 29735190000
HEAP_ENTRY Size
Prev Flags UserPtr UserSize - state
0000029744382130 0041 0000 [00] 0000029744382140
00400 - (busy)
unknown!noop
//Uninitialized memory after
allocation
0:000> db @rax
00000297`44382140 40 7c 5e 97 29 5d 5f ae-73 31 98 70 b8 4f
da ac @|^.)]_.s1.p.O..
00000297`44382150 06 51 54
18 2e 2a 23 3a-4f ab 14 27 e9 c6 2c 83
.QT..*#:O..'..,.
00000297`44382160 3a 25 b2 f6 9d e7
3c 09-cc a5 8e 27 b0 73 41 a9 :%....<....'.sA.
00000297`44382170 fb 9b 02 b5 81 3e ea 45-4c 0f ab a7 72 e3
21 e7 .....>.EL...r.!.
00000297`44382180 c8 44
84 3b c3 b5 44 8a-c9 6e 4b 2e 40 31 38 e0
.D.;..D..nK.@18.
00000297`44382190 85 f0 bd 98 3b 0b
ca b8-78 b1 9d d0 dd 4d 61 66 ....;...x....Maf
00000297`443821a0 16 7d 0a e2 40 fa f8 45-4f 79 ab 95 d8 54
f9 44 .}..@..EOy...T.D
00000297`443821b0 66 26 28
00 b7 96 52 88-15 f0 ed 34 94 5f 6f 94
f&(...R....4._o.
|
Figure 6: Allocation of memory
Partially Populating the Buffer
0x10 bytes are copied from the input file to this allocated buffer
by TIFFReadRawStrip1. The rest of the buffer remains uninitialized
with random values, as shown in Figure 7.
if ( !TIFFReadBufferSetup(v2, a2,
stripCount) ) {
return 0i64;
}
if
( TIFFReadRawStrip1(v2, v3, sizeToReadFromFile,
"TIFFFillStrip") != sizeToReadFromFile
)
0:000> r
rax=0000000000000001
rbx=000002973519a7e0 rcx=000002973519a7e0
rdx=0000000000000000 rsi=0000000000000000
rdi=0000000000000010
rip=00007ff94404d58c
rsp=000000aaa654f128 rbp=0000000000000000
r8=0000000000000010 r9=00007ff94416fc38
r10=0000000000000000
r11=000000aaa654ef60
r12=0000000000000001 r13=0000000000000000
r14=0000029744377de0 r15=0000000000000001
iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na pe nc
cs=0033
ss=002b ds=002b es=002b fs=0053 gs=002b
efl=00000202
windowscodecs!TIFFReadRawStrip1:
00007ff9`4404d58c 488bc4 mov rax,rsp
0:000> k
# Child-SP RetAddr
Call Site
00 000000aa`a654f128 00007ff9`4404d491
windowscodecs!TIFFReadRawStrip1
01 000000aa`a654f130
00007ff9`4404d3c9 windowscodecs!TIFFFillStrip+0x49
02
000000aa`a654f170 00007ff9`4404d2dc
windowscodecs!TIFFReadEncodedStrip+0x91
03
000000aa`a654f1b0 00007ff9`440396dd
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::ReadStrip+0x74
04
000000aa`a654f1e0 00007ff9`44115fca
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::GetOneUnpackedLine+0x1ad
05 000000aa`a654f2b0 00007ff9`44077400
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrProcessCopy+0x4a
06 000000aa`a654f2f0 00007ff9`44048dbb
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrReadScanline+0x20
07 000000aa`a654f320 00007ff9`44048b40
windowscodecs!CDecoderBase::CopyPixels+0x23b
08
000000aa`a654f3d0 00007ff9`44043c95
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::CopyPixels+0x80
09
000000aa`a654f4d0 00007ff9`4404563b
windowscodecs!CDecoderFrame::CopyPixels+0xb5
0:000> db 00000297`44382140
00000297`44382140 5b cd 82 55 2a 94 e2 6f-d7 2d a5 93 58 23
00 6c [..U*..o.-..X#.l // style="font-size: 12.0px;">0x10 bytes from file
00000297`44382150 06 51 54 18 2e 2a 23 3a-4f ab 14 27
e9 c6 2c 83 .QT..*#:O..'..,. // uninitialized
memory
00000297`44382160 3a 25 b2 f6 9d e7 3c 09-cc
a5 8e 27 b0 73 41 a9 :%....<....'.sA.
00000297`44382170 fb 9b 02 b5 81 3e ea 45-4c 0f ab a7 72 e3
21 e7 .....>.EL...r.!.
00000297`44382180 c8 44
84 3b c3 b5 44 8a-c9 6e 4b 2e 40 31 38 e0
.D.;..D..nK.@18.
00000297`44382190 85 f0 bd 98 3b 0b
ca b8-78 b1 9d d0 dd 4d 61 66 ....;...x....Maf
00000297`443821a0 16 7d 0a e2 40 fa f8 45-4f 79 ab 95 d8 54
f9 44 .}..@..EOy...T.D
00000297`443821b0 66 26 28
00 b7 96 52 88-15 f0 ed 34 94 5f 6f 94
f&(...R....4._o.
|
Figure 7: Partial population of memory
Use of Uninitialized Memory
0:000> r
rax=0000000000000006
rbx=0000000000000007 rcx=0000000000000200
rdx=0000000000011803 rsi=0000029744382150
rdi=0000000000000000
rip=00007ff94414e837
rsp=000000aaa654f050 rbp=0000000000000001
r8=0000029744382550 r9=0000000000000000
r10=0000000000000008
r11=0000000000000013
r12=00007ff94418b7b0 r13=0000000000000003
r14=0000000023006c00 r15=00007ff94418bbb0
iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na po nc
cs=0033
ss=002b ds=002b es=002b fs=0053 gs=002b
efl=00000206
windowscodecs!CCCITT::Expand2DLine+0x253:
00007ff9`4414e837 0fb606 movzx eax,byte ptr [rsi]
ds:00000297`44382150=06 ; style="font-size: 12.0px;">Uninitialized memory being
accessed
0:000> db 00000297`44382140
00000297`44382140 5b cd 82 55 2a 94 e2 6f-d7 2d a5 93 58 23
00 6c [..U*..o.-..X#.l // style="font-size: 12.0px;">0x10 bytes from file
00000297`44382150 06 51 54 18 2e 2a 23 3a-4f ab 14 27
e9 c6 2c 83 .QT..*#:O..'..,. // uninitialized
memory
00000297`44382160 3a 25 b2 f6 9d e7 3c 09-cc
a5 8e 27 b0 73 41 a9 :%....<....'.sA.
00000297`44382170 fb 9b 02 b5 81 3e ea 45-4c 0f ab a7 72 e3
21 e7 .....>.EL...r.!.
00000297`44382180 c8 44
84 3b c3 b5 44 8a-c9 6e 4b 2e 40 31 38 e0
.D.;..D..nK.@18.
00000297`44382190 85 f0 bd 98 3b 0b
ca b8-78 b1 9d d0 dd 4d 61 66 ....;...x....Maf
00000297`443821a0 16 7d 0a e2 40 fa f8 45-4f 79 ab 95 d8 54
f9 44 .}..@..EOy...T.D
00000297`443821b0 66 26 28
00 b7 96 52 88-15 f0 ed 34 94 5f 6f 94
f&(...R....4._o.
0:000> k
# Child-SP
RetAddr Call Site
00 000000aa`a654f050
00007ff9`4414df80
windowscodecs!CCCITT::Expand2DLine+0x253
01
000000aa`a654f0d0 00007ff9`4412afcc
windowscodecs!CCCITT::CCITT_Expand+0xac
02
000000aa`a654f120 00007ff9`4404d3f0
windowscodecs!CCITTDecode+0x7c
03 000000aa`a654f170
00007ff9`4404d2dc
windowscodecs!TIFFReadEncodedStrip+0xb8
04
000000aa`a654f1b0 00007ff9`440396dd
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::ReadStrip+0x74
05
000000aa`a654f1e0 00007ff9`44115fca
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::GetOneUnpackedLine+0x1ad
06 000000aa`a654f2b0 00007ff9`44077400
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrProcessCopy+0x4a
07 000000aa`a654f2f0 00007ff9`44048dbb
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::HrReadScanline+0x20
08 000000aa`a654f320 00007ff9`44048b40
windowscodecs!CDecoderBase::CopyPixels+0x23b
09
000000aa`a654f3d0 00007ff9`44043c95
windowscodecs!CLibTiffDecoderBase::CopyPixels+0x80
0a
000000aa`a654f4d0 00007ff9`4404563b
windowscodecs!CDecoderFrame::CopyPixels+0xb5
|
Figure 8: Reading of uninitialized value
Depending on the uninitialized value (Figure 8), different code
paths are taken in Expand2DLine, which will change the output pixels,
as shown in Figure 9.
{
{
if ( v11 !=
1 || a2 )
{
unintValue =
*++allocBuffer | (unintValue << 8); // uninit
mem read
}
else
{
unintValue <<= 8;
++allocBuffer;
}
--v11;
v16 += 8;
}
v29 = unintValue
>> (v16 - 8);
dependentUninitValue = *(l +
2i64 * v29);
v16 -=
*(l + 2i64 * v29 + 1);
if ( dependentUninitValue
>= 0 ) // path 1
break;
if ( dependentUninitValue < '\xC0' )
return 0xFFFFFFFFi64; // path 2
}
if ( dependentUninitValue <= 0x3F )
// path xx
break; |
Figure 9: Use of uninitialized memory in style="font-size: 12.0px;">if conditions
Patch
Microsoft decided to patch this vulnerability by using class="code">calloc instead of class="code">malloc, which initializes the allocated memory
with zeros.
Conclusion
Part Two of this blog series presents multiple vulnerabilities in
Windows’ built-in image parsers. In the next post, we will explore
newer supported image formats in Windows such as RAW, HEIF and more.
Source:
Fuzzing Image Parsing in Windows, Part Two: Uninitialized Memory
