exploit the possibilities
Home Files News &[SERVICES_TAB]About Contact Add New

Microsoft Chakra JIT Server Out-Of-Bounds Write

Microsoft Chakra JIT Server Out-Of-Bounds Write
Posted Aug 16, 2017
Authored by Ivan Fratric, Google Security Research

The Microsoft Chakra JIT server suffers from an out-of-bounds write when processing a Js::OpCode::ProfiledLoopStart opcode.

tags | advisory
advisories | CVE-2017-8659
SHA-256 | 387a94a74877e5ae454670d88bca2108bf8b2e2ad1eedbea3c88071c8f4cfb35

Microsoft Chakra JIT Server Out-Of-Bounds Write

Change Mirror Download
 Microsoft Chakra JIT server out-of-bounds write when processing Js::OpCode::ProfiledLoopStart opcode 

CVE-2017-8659


There is an issue in Chakra JIT server that can be potentially exploited to compromise the JIT process from a compromised browser content process. Bugs like this could potentially be used to bypass ACG (Arbitrary Code Guard) in Microsoft Edge.

The issue has been confirmed on a ChakraCore build from source.

Chakra JIT server takes bytecode as an input from the calling process. When processing the Js::OpCode::ProfiledLoopStart opcode in IRBuilder::BuildUnsigned1() function in IRBuilder.cpp there is this line

this->m_saveLoopImplicitCallFlags[num] = saveOpnd;

where num is client-controlled (it's an usigned char following the Js::OpCode::ProfiledLoopStart opcode).

m_saveLoopImplicitCallFlags is allocated in IRBuilder.h as

m_saveLoopImplicitCallFlags = (IR::Opnd**)func->m_alloc->Alloc(sizeof(IR::Opnd*) * loopCount);

where loopCount is also client-controlled (workItemData->jitData->bodyData->loopCount).

Thus if a client sets num larger than loopCount, an out-of-bounds write will occur. There appear to be no bounds checks related to this array, there are some asserts that happen *after* the overrwrite already occurred and they will not be present in the Release builds.


Note that there is also an integer overflow when m_saveLoopImplicitCallFlags is being allocated:
sizeof(IR::Opnd*) * loopCount
that's going to affect 32-bit processes.


Speaking of integer overflows that will affect 32-bit processes, there are also several other similar instances such as
this->tempMap = (SymID*)m_tempAlloc->AllocZero(sizeof(SymID) * tempCount);
in IRBuilder.cpp (as far as I can tell tempCount is going to be controllable by the user) an probably other places.


This bug is subject to a 90 day disclosure deadline. After 90 days elapse
or a patch has been made broadly available, the bug report will become
visible to the public.




Found by: ifratric

Login or Register to add favorites

File Archive:

August 2024

  • Su
  • Mo
  • Tu
  • We
  • Th
  • Fr
  • Sa
  • 1
    Aug 1st
    15 Files
  • 2
    Aug 2nd
    22 Files
  • 3
    Aug 3rd
    0 Files
  • 4
    Aug 4th
    0 Files
  • 5
    Aug 5th
    15 Files
  • 6
    Aug 6th
    11 Files
  • 7
    Aug 7th
    43 Files
  • 8
    Aug 8th
    42 Files
  • 9
    Aug 9th
    36 Files
  • 10
    Aug 10th
    0 Files
  • 11
    Aug 11th
    0 Files
  • 12
    Aug 12th
    27 Files
  • 13
    Aug 13th
    18 Files
  • 14
    Aug 14th
    50 Files
  • 15
    Aug 15th
    33 Files
  • 16
    Aug 16th
    23 Files
  • 17
    Aug 17th
    0 Files
  • 18
    Aug 18th
    0 Files
  • 19
    Aug 19th
    43 Files
  • 20
    Aug 20th
    29 Files
  • 21
    Aug 21st
    42 Files
  • 22
    Aug 22nd
    26 Files
  • 23
    Aug 23rd
    25 Files
  • 24
    Aug 24th
    0 Files
  • 25
    Aug 25th
    0 Files
  • 26
    Aug 26th
    0 Files
  • 27
    Aug 27th
    0 Files
  • 28
    Aug 28th
    0 Files
  • 29
    Aug 29th
    0 Files
  • 30
    Aug 30th
    0 Files
  • 31
    Aug 31st
    0 Files

Top Authors In Last 30 Days

File Tags

Systems

packet storm

© 2024 Packet Storm. All rights reserved.

Services
Security Services
Hosting By
Rokasec
close