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

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
SHA-256 | 14a279bae66e49056c0e4b2a9091c3240e0fe8851027046cca926102cea4471b

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

Login or Register to add favorites

File Archive:

March 2024

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

Top Authors In Last 30 Days

File Tags

Systems

packet storm

© 2022 Packet Storm. All rights reserved.

Services
Security Services
Hosting By
Rokasec
close