Difference between revisions of "Unintentional pointer scaling"

From OWASP
Jump to: navigation, search
(Description)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{Template:SecureSoftware}}
 
{{Template:SecureSoftware}}
 
{{Template:Vulnerability}}
 
{{Template:Vulnerability}}
 
[[Category:FIXME|This is the text from the old template. This needs to be rewritten using the new template.]]
 
  
 
Last revision (mm/dd/yy): '''{{REVISIONMONTH}}/{{REVISIONDAY}}/{{REVISIONYEAR}}'''
 
Last revision (mm/dd/yy): '''{{REVISIONMONTH}}/{{REVISIONDAY}}/{{REVISIONYEAR}}'''
  
 
[[ASDR_TOC_Vulnerabilities|Vulnerabilities Table of Contents]]
 
[[ASDR_TOC_Vulnerabilities|Vulnerabilities Table of Contents]]
 
[[ASDR Table of Contents]]
 
__TOC__
 
 
  
 
==Description==
 
==Description==
 
+
In C and C++, one may accidentally refer to the wrong memory due to the semantics of when math operations are implicitly scaled.
In C and C++, one may often accidentally refer to the wrong memory due to the semantics of when math operations are implicitly scaled.
+
  
 
'''Consequences'''
 
'''Consequences'''
Line 42: Line 35:
  
 
Programmers will often try to index from a pointer by adding a number of bytes, even though this is wrong, since C and C++ implicitly scale the operand by the size of the data type.
 
Programmers will often try to index from a pointer by adding a number of bytes, even though this is wrong, since C and C++ implicitly scale the operand by the size of the data type.
 
  
 
==Risk Factors==
 
==Risk Factors==

Latest revision as of 08:23, 1 March 2009

This is a Vulnerability. To view all vulnerabilities, please see the Vulnerability Category page.


Last revision (mm/dd/yy): 03/1/2009

Vulnerabilities Table of Contents

Description

In C and C++, one may accidentally refer to the wrong memory due to the semantics of when math operations are implicitly scaled.

Consequences

Often results in buffer overflow conditions.

Exposure period

  • Design: Could choose a language with abstractions for memory access.
  • Implementation: This problem generally is due to a programmer error.

Platform

C and C++.

Required resources

Any

Severity

High

Likelihood of exploit

Medium

Programmers will often try to index from a pointer by adding a number of bytes, even though this is wrong, since C and C++ implicitly scale the operand by the size of the data type.

Risk Factors

TBD

Examples

int *p = x;
char * second_char = (char *)(p + 1);

In this example, second_char is intended to point to the second byte of p. But, adding 1 to p actually adds sizeof(int) to p, giving a result that is incorrect (3 bytes off on 32-bit platforms).

If the resulting memory address is read, this could potentially be an information leak. If it is a write, it could be a security-critical write to unauthorized memory - whether or not it is a buffer overflow.

Note that the above code may also be wrong in other ways, particularly in a little endian environment.


Related Attacks


Related Vulnerabilities


Related Controls

  • Design: Use a platform with high-level memory abstractions.
  • Implementation: Always use array indexing instead of direct pointer manipulation.
  • Other: Use technologies for preventing buffer overflows.


Related Technical Impacts


References

TBD