I'm curious about how overwriting the stack is different in the main function than in other functions
Take this example:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
char buf[8];
gets(buf);
}
In this code, the buffer to be overflowed is created in the main function, and as a result I receive this output from gdb after entering in a lot of 'A's:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x5655620c in main (argc=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414141>,
argv=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414145>) at source.c:7
7 }
(gdb) info registers eip
eip 0x5655620c 0x5655620c <main+63>
Disassembly for main:
0x000011cd <+0>: endbr32
0x000011d1 <+4>: lea ecx,[esp+0x4]
0x000011d5 <+8>: and esp,0xfffffff0
0x000011d8 <+11>: push DWORD PTR [ecx-0x4]
0x000011db <+14>: push ebp
0x000011dc <+15>: mov ebp,esp
0x000011de <+17>: push ebx
0x000011df <+18>: push ecx
0x000011e0 <+19>: sub esp,0x10
0x000011e3 <+22>: call 0x120d <__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax>
0x000011e8 <+27>: add eax,0x2df0
0x000011ed <+32>: sub esp,0xc
0x000011f0 <+35>: lea edx,[ebp-0x10]
0x000011f3 <+38>: push edx
0x000011f4 <+39>: mov ebx,eax
0x000011f6 <+41>: call 0x1070 <gets@plt>
0x000011fb <+46>: add esp,0x10
0x000011fe <+49>: mov eax,0x0
0x00001203 <+54>: lea esp,[ebp-0x8]
0x00001206 <+57>: pop ecx
0x00001207 <+58>: pop ebx
0x00001208 <+59>: pop ebp
0x00001209 <+60>: lea esp,[ecx-0x4]
0x0000120c <+63>: ret
Here, the EIP register was not overwritten and apparently gdb cannot access memory at an overwritten address.
Whereas in this example where the buffer stuff is written in another function:
#include <stdio.h>
void over() {
char buf[8];
gets(buf);
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
over();
}
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x41414141 in ?? ()
(gdb) info registers eip
eip 0x41414141 0x41414141
Disassembly for main:
0x000011f9 <+0>: endbr32
0x000011fd <+4>: push ebp
0x000011fe <+5>: mov ebp,esp
0x00001200 <+7>: and esp,0xfffffff0
0x00001203 <+10>: call 0x1219 <__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax>
0x00001208 <+15>: add eax,0x2dd0
0x0000120d <+20>: call 0x11cd <over>
0x00001212 <+25>: mov eax,0x0
0x00001217 <+30>: leave
0x00001218 <+31>: ret
Disassembly for over:
0x000011cd <+0>: endbr32
0x000011d1 <+4>: push ebp
0x000011d2 <+5>: mov ebp,esp
0x000011d4 <+7>: push ebx
0x000011d5 <+8>: sub esp,0x14
0x000011d8 <+11>: call 0x1219 <__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax>
0x000011dd <+16>: add eax,0x2dfb
0x000011e2 <+21>: sub esp,0xc
0x000011e5 <+24>: lea edx,[ebp-0x10]
0x000011e8 <+27>: push edx
0x000011e9 <+28>: mov ebx,eax
0x000011eb <+30>: call 0x1070 <gets@plt>
0x000011f0 <+35>: add esp,0x10
0x000011f3 <+38>: nop
0x000011f4 <+39>: mov ebx,DWORD PTR [ebp-0x4]
0x000011f7 <+42>: leave
0x000011f8 <+43>: ret
A slightly different message is provided and the EIP is overwritten
Why does this make a difference? Why is the EIP not overwritten when the buffer is created in the main function?
I am using: gcc version 9.3.0 (Ubuntu 9.3.0-17ubuntu1~20.04)
And compiled with: gcc -m32 -g -fno-stack-protector source.c -o vuln -z execstack
The difference is pretty arbitrary. The exact prologue/epilogue instruction sequence generated by GCC is different for over() in the second example than it is for main() in the first example. So it crashes it a very different way, from a debugger's point of view. After single-stepping in GDB, you can see why, and I have just killed some time doing so.
The stack is thoroughly corrupt upon returning from gets(), so all bets are off, but anyway, here goes. I run the first example, setting a breakpoint immediately after returning from the call to gets():
(gdb) disassemble main
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x0804842b <+0>: lea 0x4(%esp),%ecx
0x0804842f <+4>: and $0xfffffff0,%esp
0x08048432 <+7>: pushl -0x4(%ecx)
0x08048435 <+10>: push %ebp
0x08048436 <+11>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x08048438 <+13>: push %ecx
0x08048439 <+14>: sub $0x14,%esp
0x0804843c <+17>: sub $0xc,%esp
0x0804843f <+20>: lea -0x10(%ebp),%eax
0x08048442 <+23>: push %eax
0x08048443 <+24>: call 0x80482e0 <gets@plt>
0x08048448 <+29>: add $0x10,%esp
0x0804844b <+32>: mov $0x0,%eax
0x08048450 <+37>: mov -0x4(%ebp),%ecx
0x08048453 <+40>: leave
0x08048454 <+41>: lea -0x4(%ecx),%esp
0x08048457 <+44>: ret
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) b *0x08048448
Breakpoint 1 at 0x8048448: file source.c, line 6.
(gdb)
Now continue to enter some garbage, hit the breakpoint, and start single-stepping:
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/lstrand/tmp/vuln
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Breakpoint 1, 0x08048448 in main (argc=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414141>,
argv=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414145>) at source.c:6
6 gets(buf);
(gdb) disassemble
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x0804842b <+0>: lea 0x4(%esp),%ecx
0x0804842f <+4>: and $0xfffffff0,%esp
0x08048432 <+7>: pushl -0x4(%ecx)
0x08048435 <+10>: push %ebp
0x08048436 <+11>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x08048438 <+13>: push %ecx
0x08048439 <+14>: sub $0x14,%esp
0x0804843c <+17>: sub $0xc,%esp
0x0804843f <+20>: lea -0x10(%ebp),%eax
0x08048442 <+23>: push %eax
0x08048443 <+24>: call 0x80482e0 <gets@plt>
=> 0x08048448 <+29>: add $0x10,%esp
0x0804844b <+32>: mov $0x0,%eax
0x08048450 <+37>: mov -0x4(%ebp),%ecx
0x08048453 <+40>: leave
0x08048454 <+41>: lea -0x4(%ecx),%esp
0x08048457 <+44>: ret
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) bt
#0 0x08048448 in main (argc=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414141>,
argv=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414145>) at source.c:6
Backtrace stopped: Cannot access memory at address 0x4141413d
(gdb) stepi
0x0804844b 6 gets(buf);
(gdb)
7 }
(gdb)
0x08048453 7 }
(gdb)
0x08048454 7 }
(gdb)
0x08048457 7 }
(gdb)
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x08048457 in main (argc=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414141>,
argv=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414145>) at source.c:7
7 }
(gdb) bt
#0 0x08048457 in main (argc=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414141>,
argv=<error reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x41414145>) at source.c:7
Backtrace stopped: Cannot access memory at address 0x4141413d
(gdb) info reg
eax 0x0 0
ecx 0x41414141 1094795585
edx 0xf7fa589c -134588260
ebx 0x0 0
esp 0x4141413d 0x4141413d
ebp 0x41414141 0x41414141
esi 0xf7fa4000 -134594560
edi 0x0 0
eip 0x8048457 0x8048457 <main+44>
eflags 0x10286 [ PF SF IF RF ]
cs 0x23 35
ss 0x2b 43
ds 0x2b 43
es 0x2b 43
fs 0x0 0
gs 0x63 99
(gdb)
Here, we die on the ret instruction in main() because the stack pointer esp has the bad value 0x4141413d. GDB correctly pinpoints the failing instruction as being in main().
But what happens in the over() case? Let's take a look:
lstrand@styx:~/tmp$ gdb ./vuln2
GNU gdb (Ubuntu 8.1-0ubuntu3.2) 8.1.0.20180409-git
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type "show copying"
and "show warranty" for details.
This GDB was configured as "x86_64-linux-gnu".
Type "show configuration" for configuration details.
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/>.
Find the GDB manual and other documentation resources online at:
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/documentation/>.
For help, type "help".
Type "apropos word" to search for commands related to "word"...
Reading symbols from ./vuln2...done.
(gdb) disassemble over
Dump of assembler code for function over:
0x0804842b <+0>: push %ebp
0x0804842c <+1>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x0804842e <+3>: sub $0x18,%esp
0x08048431 <+6>: sub $0xc,%esp
0x08048434 <+9>: lea -0x10(%ebp),%eax
0x08048437 <+12>: push %eax
0x08048438 <+13>: call 0x80482e0 <gets@plt>
0x0804843d <+18>: add $0x10,%esp
0x08048440 <+21>: nop
0x08048441 <+22>: leave
0x08048442 <+23>: ret
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) b *0x0804843d
Breakpoint 1 at 0x804843d: file source2.c, line 5.
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/lstrand/tmp/vuln2
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAa
Breakpoint 1, 0x0804843d in over () at source2.c:5
5 gets(buf);
(gdb) disassemble
Dump of assembler code for function over:
0x0804842b <+0>: push %ebp
0x0804842c <+1>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x0804842e <+3>: sub $0x18,%esp
0x08048431 <+6>: sub $0xc,%esp
0x08048434 <+9>: lea -0x10(%ebp),%eax
0x08048437 <+12>: push %eax
0x08048438 <+13>: call 0x80482e0 <gets@plt>
=> 0x0804843d <+18>: add $0x10,%esp
0x08048440 <+21>: nop
0x08048441 <+22>: leave
0x08048442 <+23>: ret
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) info reg
eax 0xffffd198 -11880
ecx 0xf7fa45c0 -134593088
edx 0xf7fa589c -134588260
ebx 0x0 0
esp 0xffffd180 0xffffd180
ebp 0xffffd1a8 0xffffd1a8
esi 0xf7fa4000 -134594560
edi 0x0 0
eip 0x804843d 0x804843d <over+18>
eflags 0x246 [ PF ZF IF ]
cs 0x23 35
ss 0x2b 43
ds 0x2b 43
es 0x2b 43
fs 0x0 0
gs 0x63 99
(gdb) stepi
6 }
(gdb)
0x08048441 6 }
(gdb)
0x08048442 6 }
(gdb) stepi
0x41414141 in ?? ()
(gdb) info reg
eax 0xffffd198 -11880
ecx 0xf7fa45c0 -134593088
edx 0xf7fa589c -134588260
ebx 0x0 0
esp 0xffffd1b0 0xffffd1b0
ebp 0x41414141 0x41414141
esi 0xf7fa4000 -134594560
edi 0x0 0
eip 0x41414141 0x41414141
eflags 0x286 [ PF SF IF ]
cs 0x23 35
ss 0x2b 43
ds 0x2b 43
es 0x2b 43
fs 0x0 0
gs 0x63 99
(gdb) stepi
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x41414141 in ?? ()
(gdb)
Note the subtle difference here. In this case, the epilogue code unwinds %esp with simple arithetic: "add $0x10,%esp" (as opposed to restoring it from the stack, as in the first case). The 'leave' instruction puts garbage into the frame pointer %ebp, but the new %esp value obtained from %ebp is still valid. Then the ret instruction sucessfully executes, leaving us a bad ip, 0x41414141. And then the program dies with SIGSEGV trying to read an instruction from nowhere.
In this case, GDB has no hope of unwinding the stack:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x41414141 in ?? ()
(gdb) bt
#0 0x41414141 in ?? ()
#1 0x41414141 in ?? ()
#2 0x41414141 in ?? ()
#3 0x41414141 in ?? ()
#4 0x41414141 in ?? ()
#5 0xf7006141 in ?? ()
#6 0xf7fa4000 in ?? () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)
(gdb)
Recall in the first case, the program died on the ret instruction itself because %esp was already bad. In the first case GDB can still find where the program is, but in the second case it cannot.