what you don't know can hurt you

JSC DFG Incorrect Decision On Behavior

JSC DFG Incorrect Decision On Behavior
Posted May 21, 2019
Authored by saelo, Google Security Research

JSC DFG's doesGC() is incorrect about the HasIndexedProperty operation's behavior on StringObjects.

tags | advisory
advisories | CVE-2019-8622
MD5 | 447815ba563e6a4e43af5179de5f3476

JSC DFG Incorrect Decision On Behavior

Change Mirror Download
JSC: DFG's doesGC() is incorrect about the HasIndexedProperty operation's behaviour on StringObjects 

Related CVE Numbers: CVE-2019-8622.


See also https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=1699 for a similar issue.

The DFG JIT compiler attempts to determine whether a DFG IR operation could cause garbage collection (GC) during its execution [1]. With this, it is then possible for the compiler to determine whether there could be a GC between point A and point B in a function, which in turn can be used to omit write barriers (see e.g. https://v8.dev/blog/concurrent-marking#reducing-marking-pause for an explanation of write barriers) [2]. For example, in case an (incremental) GC cannot happen between an allocation of an object and a property store to it, the write barrier after the property store can be omitted (because in that case the newly allocated object could not already have been marked, so must be white). However, if the analysis is incorrect and a GC can happen in between, then the emitted code can cause use-after-free issues, e.g. if an unmarked (white) object is assigned as property to an object that was marked during an unexpected GC (and is thus black).

Since commit 9725889d5172a204aa1120e06be9eab117357f4b [3] \"Add code to validate expected GC activity modelled by doesGC() against what the runtime encounters\", JSC, in debug builds, asserts that the information computed by doesGC is correct: \"In DFG::SpeculativeJIT::compile() and FTL::LowerDFGToB3::compileNode(), before emitting code / B3IR for each DFG node, we emit a write to set Heap::m_expectDoesGC to the value returned by doesGC() for that node. In the runtime (i.e. in allocateCell() and functions that can resolve a rope), we assert that Heap::m_expectDoesGC is true.\". The following sample (found through fuzzing and then simplified), triggers such an assertion:

function f(a) {
return 0 in a;
}
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
const s = new String('asdf');
s[42] = 'x'; // Give it ArrayStorage
f(s);
}

Here, the `in` operation is converted to a HasIndexedProperty DFG operation [4]. Since the String object has ArrayStorage (due to the additional element), DFGClobberize will report that it does not write to the heap [5]. Afterwards, doesGC reports that the operation cannot trigger GC [6]. However, during the execution of the operation (in the DFG JIT implemented by a call to operationHasIndexedPropertyByInt [7]) the code ends up in JSString::getIndex (to determine whether the index is valid in the underlying string), which can end up flattening a rope string, thus causing a heap allocation and thus potentially causing garbage collection. This is where, in debug builds, the assertion fails:

ASSERTION FAILED: vm()->heap.expectDoesGC()
../../Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/JSString.h(1023) : WTF::StringView JSC::JSString::unsafeView(JSC::ExecState *) const
1 0x10d67e769 WTFCrash
2 0x10bb6948b WTFCrashWithInfo(int, char const*, char const*, int)
3 0x10bba9e59 JSC::JSString::unsafeView(JSC::ExecState*) const
4 0x10bba9c6e JSC::JSString::getIndex(JSC::ExecState*, unsigned int)
5 0x10c712a24 JSC::JSString::getStringPropertySlot(JSC::ExecState*, unsigned int, JSC::PropertySlot&)
6 0x10d330b90 JSC::StringObject::getOwnPropertySlotByIndex(JSC::JSObject*, JSC::ExecState*, unsigned int, JSC::PropertySlot&)
7 0x10bbaa368 JSC::JSObject::getPropertySlot(JSC::ExecState*, unsigned int, JSC::PropertySlot&)
8 0x10d20d831 JSC::JSObject::hasPropertyGeneric(JSC::ExecState*, unsigned int, JSC::PropertySlot::InternalMethodType) const
9 0x10c70132f operationHasIndexedPropertyByInt

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

[1] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/3d654baa90ee906da6de3a4f19eaa48b2e90a5bc/Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGDoesGC.cpp#L38
[2] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/3d654baa90ee906da6de3a4f19eaa48b2e90a5bc/Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGStoreBarrierInsertionPhase.cpp#L442
[3] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/commit/9725889d5172a204aa1120e06be9eab117357f4b
[4] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/3d654baa90ee906da6de3a4f19eaa48b2e90a5bc/Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGFixupPhase.cpp#L1681
[5] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/3d654baa90ee906da6de3a4f19eaa48b2e90a5bc/Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGClobberize.h#L344
[6] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/3d654baa90ee906da6de3a4f19eaa48b2e90a5bc/Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGDoesGC.cpp#L198
[7] https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/3d654baa90ee906da6de3a4f19eaa48b2e90a5bc/Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGOperations.cpp#L2073", "sequenceNum": 3, "timestamp": 1552319568}]"


Found by: saelo@google.com

Comments

RSS Feed Subscribe to this comment feed

No comments yet, be the first!

Login or Register to post a comment

File Archive:

June 2019

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

Top Authors In Last 30 Days

File Tags

Systems

packet storm

© 2019 Packet Storm. All rights reserved.

Services
Security Services
Hosting By
Rokasec
close