[12523] in bugtraq

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

Re: ImmuniX OS Security Alert: StackGuard 1.21 Released

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Crispin Cowan)
Thu Nov 11 12:17:06 1999

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id:  <3829EC71.70C61F30@cse.ogi.edu>
Date:         Wed, 10 Nov 1999 22:06:42 +0000
Reply-To: crispin@CSE.OGI.EDU
From: Crispin Cowan <crispin@CSE.OGI.EDU>
X-To:         Gerardo Richarte <core.lists.bugtraq@CORE-SDI.COM>
To: BUGTRAQ@SECURITYFOCUS.COM

Gerardo Richarte wrote:

>     I think that having this kind of overflow available, StackWard is
> still vulnerable to a little smarter attack.

I assume you mean "StackGuard".  I've never heard of StackWard, and
neither has Altavista.  If someone needs a catch project name, "stackward"
seems to be available :-)


>     You may think that this code example is too tricky, but there was a
> buffer overflow in bind's inverse query
> (http://www.securityfocus.com/vdb/bottom.html?vid=134) like this. This
> makes me remember of some code I wrote to exploit this for Sparcs, as
> it was just one call deep, it was imposible to overwrite the return
> address, so, by using a memcpy() to a pointer I could overwrite (like
> that one in
> the example code) I overwrited part of the libc in memory, lets say
> printf, so when the program called printf() after the second memcpy(),
> instead of calling the original printf() it called my code: Here you
> have an exploit that can be used still if you have StackWard.

You appear to be describing a buffer overflow that attacks a pointer, and
not the activation record.  StackGuard only claims to protect the
activation record, so while this is a legitimate vulnerability that
StackGuard does not prevent, it is not actually a bug in StackGuard.

We are developing a future product called "PointGuard" that will try to
apply StackGuard-style integrity checking to code pointers, but it is a
long way from ready.  If I understand your bind vulnerability correctly,
it is the kind of thing that PointGuard would be able to defend against.

Crispin
-----
Crispin Cowan, CTO, WireX Communications, Inc.    http://wirex.com
Free Hardened Linux Distribution:                 http://immunix.org

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post