Debian
mono package

mono has an executable stack on 32bit

Bug #408499 reported by Kees Cook on 2009-08-03

This bug affects 1 person

	Status	Importance	Assigned to
mono (Debian)	New	Unknown	debbugs #539807
mono (Gentoo Linux)	Won't Fix	Medium	gentoo-bugs #220337
mono (Ubuntu)	Triaged	Wishlist	Unassigned
mono (openSUSE)	Invalid	Medium	novell-bugs #439086

Bug Description

Binary package hint: mono

mono lacks stack markings on mono/mini/mdb-debug-info32.s, which is recommended for improved security.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Roadmap/ExecutableStacks

ProblemType: Bug
Architecture: i386
Date: Mon Aug 3 18:33:32 2009
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
Package: mono-runtime 2.4+dfsg-5ubuntu1
ProcEnviron:
PATH=(custom, user)
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-4.23-generic
SourcePackage: mono
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-4-generic i686

See original description

Tags:

Related branches

lp://staging/ubuntu/lucid/mono

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Rafał Mużyło (galtgendo) wrote on 2008-10-26:

This has came up when I was looking at the biuld system mono uses.
I'm not sure I classified this bug correctly.

The problem is:
in revision 69955, mono/mini/mdb-debug-info64.s did receive a fix to
prevent that executable from getting an executable stack,
but my question is: what was the reason mono/mini/mdb-debug-info32.s
didn't receive same fix ?

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Vargaz (vargaz) wrote on 2008-10-26:

-> runtime.

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Rafał Mużyło (galtgendo) wrote on 2009-03-22:

Well, after five months, I'd be happy to receive any answer,
even "your question is stupid", as long as it explains, why is it
stupid.

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Vargaz (vargaz) wrote on 2009-03-22:

I have no idea.

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Rafał Mużyło (galtgendo) wrote on 2009-03-22:

Well, somebody did create that revision, so
perhaps that person can shed some light on this issue ?

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Leszek 'skolima' Ciesielski (skolima) wrote on 2009-04-02:

#10

That change has been made by Martin Baulig, so I'm adding him as CC.

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Ub71a-martin-b69y0 (ub71a-martin-b69y0) wrote on 2009-04-02:

#11

Setting to RESOLVED / INVALID since this is not a bug but a question ....

Rafal, if I remember correctly this is only on x86_64 because the on-executable stack needs hardware and kernel support which exists on the AMD64, but not necessarily on i386.

I'm not entirely sure since it's been a very long time since I wrote that code, but I think the reason for making the stack non-executable was because that is the default in mono when running on x86_64, but not on i386.

Martin

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Rafał Mużyło (galtgendo) wrote on 2009-04-02:

#12

(In reply to comment #6)
> Setting to RESOLVED / INVALID since this is not a bug but a question ....
>
> Rafal, if I remember correctly this is only on x86_64 because the on-executable
> stack needs hardware and kernel support which exists on the AMD64, but not
> necessarily on i386.
>
> I'm not entirely sure since it's been a very long time since I wrote that code,
> but I think the reason for making the stack non-executable was because that is
> the default in mono when running on x86_64, but not on i386.
>
> Martin

Well, that's definitely an answer to a question, just not to mine.

Mine was: during build of mono on x86, libraries/executables
are created by gnu linker, which contain executable stack;
the sole source of it is mono/mini/mdb-debug-info32.s;
does mono need this file to create executable stack in
those libraries/executables ?

Note, that I did try to add that note for non-executable
in that file and mono built fine and it did compile a trivial
program, I'm simply not sure, if I did broke anything that way.

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Rafał Mużyło (galtgendo) wrote on 2009-04-02:

#13

Or more exactly: on amd64 executable stack is not needed,
is it different on x86 ?

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Kees Cook (kees) wrote on 2009-08-03:

#14

Ironically, the mono/mini/mdb-debug-info64.s file doesn't need the markings at all. the mono/mini/mdb-debug-info32.s is the one that needs the markings (since only ia32 defaults to executable stack when asm lacks the flags).

Revision history for this message

Kees Cook (kees) wrote on 2009-08-03:

Dependencies.txt Edit (439 bytes, text/plain; charset="utf-8")

Changed in mono (Ubuntu):
status:	New → Confirmed

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2009-08-03

Changed in mono (Gentoo Linux):
status:	Unknown → Confirmed

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2009-08-03

Changed in mono (openSUSE):
status:	Unknown → Confirmed

Revision history for this message

In Novell/SUSE Bugzilla #439086, Ub71a-martin-b69y0 (ub71a-martin-b69y0) wrote on 2009-08-03:

#15

Since we're not going to touch this code anyways, -> RESOLVED / INVALID again.

Revision history for this message

Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote on 2009-08-04:

This bug was fixed in the package mono - 2.4+dfsg-5ubuntu2

---------------
mono (2.4+dfsg-5ubuntu2) karmic; urgency=low

* Added debian/patches/fix_exec_stack.dpatch: mark up missed
flags for x86 asm (LP: #408499, debian bug 539807).

-- Kees Cook <email address hidden> Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:47:55 -0700

Changed in mono (Ubuntu):
status:	Confirmed → Fix Released

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2009-08-04

Changed in mono (openSUSE):
status:	Confirmed → Invalid

Kees Cook (kees) on 2009-08-06

visibility:	private → public
description:	updated

Revision history for this message

Kees Cook (kees) wrote on 2009-08-06:

It seems that mono actually does use the stack for execution, but only when using the debugger. :(

$ echo 'class MainClass { static void Main() { System.Console.WriteLine("Hello World!"); } }' > hello.cs
$ gmcs hello.cs
$ mdb ./hello.exe
Mono Debugger
(mdb) run
Starting program: ./hello.exe
Cannot read symbol file `/usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.mdb': Could not find file "/usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.mdb".
Cannot read symbol file `/home/kees/hello.exe.mdb': Could not find file "/home/kees/hello.exe.mdb".
(mdb) Thread @1 received signal 11 at #0: 0xff87c909.
0xff87c909 push $0xff87c932
quit
The program is running. Exit anyway? (y or n) y
Thread @1 exited.
Process #1 exited.
Target exited.

Changed in mono (Ubuntu):
status:	Fix Released → Confirmed

Kees Cook (kees) on 2009-08-06

summary:

- mono has a needlessly executable stack
+ mono has an executable stack

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2009-08-06

Changed in mono (Debian):
status:	Unknown → New

Revision history for this message

Kees Cook (kees) wrote on 2009-09-03: Re: mono has an executable stack

After some upstream discussion, it seems that Mono's debugger injects marshallers onto the debug-ee's stack and executes them. Possible work-around: leave Mono non-exec-stack, but have the debugger inject an mprotect call to gain stack-exec. Probably as much work as correctly fixing the marshallers.

Changed in mono (Ubuntu):
status:	Confirmed → Triaged
importance:	Undecided → Medium

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2010-11-04

Changed in mono (Gentoo Linux):
status:	Confirmed → Won't Fix

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2011-02-04

Changed in mono (Gentoo Linux):
importance:	Unknown → Medium

Kees Cook (kees) on 2011-04-27

security vulnerability:	yes → no
Changed in mono (Ubuntu):
importance:	Medium → Wishlist
summary:	- mono has an executable stack + mono has an executable stack on 32bit