Skip to content

bgpd, lib: fix bgpd core on startup#12

Closed
qlyoung wants to merge 1 commit intoFRRouting:masterfrom
qlyoung:bgpd-core-fix
Closed

bgpd, lib: fix bgpd core on startup#12
qlyoung wants to merge 1 commit intoFRRouting:masterfrom
qlyoung:bgpd-core-fix

Conversation

@qlyoung
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@qlyoung qlyoung commented Dec 16, 2016

Fixes #11

Edit: already in master

Signed-off-by: Quentin Young qlyoung@cumulusnetworks.com

Signed-off-by: Quentin Young <qlyoung@cumulusnetworks.com>
@qlyoung qlyoung closed this Dec 16, 2016
@qlyoung qlyoung deleted the bgpd-core-fix branch May 10, 2017 17:41
cfra referenced this pull request in opensourcerouting/frr Nov 29, 2018
rwestphal referenced this pull request in opensourcerouting/frr Feb 21, 2019
If path->net is NULL in the bgp_path_info_free() function, then
bgpd would crash in bgp_addpath_free_info_data() with the following
backtrace:

 (gdb) bt
 #0  __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:51
 #1  0x00007ff7b267a42a in __GI_abort () at abort.c:89
 #2  0x00007ff7b39c1ca0 in core_handler (signo=11, siginfo=0x7ffff66414f0, context=<optimized out>) at lib/sigevent.c:249
 #3  <signal handler called>
 #4  idalloc_free_to_pool (pool_ptr=pool_ptr@entry=0x0, id=3) at lib/id_alloc.c:368
 #5  0x0000560096246688 in bgp_addpath_free_info_data (d=d@entry=0x560098665468, nd=0x0) at bgpd/bgp_addpath.c:100
 #6  0x00005600961bb522 in bgp_path_info_free (path=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:252
 #7  bgp_path_info_unlock (path=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:276
 #8  0x00005600961bb719 in bgp_path_info_reap (rn=rn@entry=0x5600986b2110, pi=pi@entry=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:320
 #9  0x00005600961bf4db in bgp_process_main_one (safi=SAFI_MPLS_VPN, afi=AFI_IP, rn=0x5600986b2110, bgp=0x560098587320) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:2476
 #10 bgp_process_wq (wq=<optimized out>, data=0x56009869b8f0) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:2503
 #11 0x00007ff7b39d5fcc in work_queue_run (thread=0x7ffff6641e10) at lib/workqueue.c:294
 #12 0x00007ff7b39ce3b1 in thread_call (thread=thread@entry=0x7ffff6641e10) at lib/thread.c:1606
 #13 0x00007ff7b39a3538 in frr_run (master=0x5600980795b0) at lib/libfrr.c:1011
 #14 0x000056009618a5a3 in main (argc=3, argv=0x7ffff6642078) at bgpd/bgp_main.c:481

Add a null-check protection to fix this problem.

Signed-off-by: Renato Westphal <renato@opensourcerouting.org>
rwestphal referenced this pull request in opensourcerouting/frr Feb 21, 2019
If path->net is NULL in the bgp_path_info_free() function, then
bgpd would crash in bgp_addpath_free_info_data() with the following
backtrace:

 (gdb) bt
 #0  __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:51
 #1  0x00007ff7b267a42a in __GI_abort () at abort.c:89
 #2  0x00007ff7b39c1ca0 in core_handler (signo=11, siginfo=0x7ffff66414f0, context=<optimized out>) at lib/sigevent.c:249
 #3  <signal handler called>
 #4  idalloc_free_to_pool (pool_ptr=pool_ptr@entry=0x0, id=3) at lib/id_alloc.c:368
 #5  0x0000560096246688 in bgp_addpath_free_info_data (d=d@entry=0x560098665468, nd=0x0) at bgpd/bgp_addpath.c:100
 #6  0x00005600961bb522 in bgp_path_info_free (path=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:252
 #7  bgp_path_info_unlock (path=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:276
 #8  0x00005600961bb719 in bgp_path_info_reap (rn=rn@entry=0x5600986b2110, pi=pi@entry=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:320
 #9  0x00005600961bf4db in bgp_process_main_one (safi=SAFI_MPLS_VPN, afi=AFI_IP, rn=0x5600986b2110, bgp=0x560098587320) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:2476
 #10 bgp_process_wq (wq=<optimized out>, data=0x56009869b8f0) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:2503
 #11 0x00007ff7b39d5fcc in work_queue_run (thread=0x7ffff6641e10) at lib/workqueue.c:294
 #12 0x00007ff7b39ce3b1 in thread_call (thread=thread@entry=0x7ffff6641e10) at lib/thread.c:1606
 #13 0x00007ff7b39a3538 in frr_run (master=0x5600980795b0) at lib/libfrr.c:1011
 #14 0x000056009618a5a3 in main (argc=3, argv=0x7ffff6642078) at bgpd/bgp_main.c:481

Add a null-check protection to fix this problem.

Signed-off-by: Renato Westphal <renato@opensourcerouting.org>
@louberger louberger mentioned this pull request May 1, 2019
qlyoung pushed a commit to qlyoung/frr that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2019
If path->net is NULL in the bgp_path_info_free() function, then
bgpd would crash in bgp_addpath_free_info_data() with the following
backtrace:

 (gdb) bt
 #0  __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:51
 #1  0x00007ff7b267a42a in __GI_abort () at abort.c:89
 #2  0x00007ff7b39c1ca0 in core_handler (signo=11, siginfo=0x7ffff66414f0, context=<optimized out>) at lib/sigevent.c:249
 #3  <signal handler called>
 #4  idalloc_free_to_pool (pool_ptr=pool_ptr@entry=0x0, id=3) at lib/id_alloc.c:368
 #5  0x0000560096246688 in bgp_addpath_free_info_data (d=d@entry=0x560098665468, nd=0x0) at bgpd/bgp_addpath.c:100
 #6  0x00005600961bb522 in bgp_path_info_free (path=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:252
 #7  bgp_path_info_unlock (path=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:276
 #8  0x00005600961bb719 in bgp_path_info_reap (rn=rn@entry=0x5600986b2110, pi=pi@entry=0x560098665400) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:320
 #9  0x00005600961bf4db in bgp_process_main_one (safi=SAFI_MPLS_VPN, afi=AFI_IP, rn=0x5600986b2110, bgp=0x560098587320) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:2476
 FRRouting#10 bgp_process_wq (wq=<optimized out>, data=0x56009869b8f0) at bgpd/bgp_route.c:2503
 FRRouting#11 0x00007ff7b39d5fcc in work_queue_run (thread=0x7ffff6641e10) at lib/workqueue.c:294
 FRRouting#12 0x00007ff7b39ce3b1 in thread_call (thread=thread@entry=0x7ffff6641e10) at lib/thread.c:1606
 FRRouting#13 0x00007ff7b39a3538 in frr_run (master=0x5600980795b0) at lib/libfrr.c:1011
 FRRouting#14 0x000056009618a5a3 in main (argc=3, argv=0x7ffff6642078) at bgpd/bgp_main.c:481

Add a null-check protection to fix this problem.

Signed-off-by: Renato Westphal <renato@opensourcerouting.org>
riw777 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2019
Our Address Sanitizer CI is finding this issue:
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	r4: bgpd triggered an exception by AddressSanitizer
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7ffdd425b060 at pc 0x00000068575f bp 0x7ffdd4258550 sp 0x7ffdd4258540
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	READ of size 1 at 0x7ffdd425b060 thread T0
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #0 0x68575e in prefix_cmp lib/prefix.c:776
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #1 0x5889f5 in rfapiItBiIndexSearch bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:2230
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #2 0x5889f5 in rfapiBgpInfoFilteredImportVPN bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:3520
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #3 0x58b909 in rfapiProcessWithdraw bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:4071
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #4 0x4c459b in bgp_withdraw bgpd/bgp_route.c:3736
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #5 0x484122 in bgp_nlri_parse_vpn bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c:237
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #6 0x497f52 in bgp_nlri_parse bgpd/bgp_packet.c:315
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #7 0x49d06d in bgp_update_receive bgpd/bgp_packet.c:1598
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #8 0x49d06d in bgp_process_packet bgpd/bgp_packet.c:2274
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #9 0x6b9f54 in thread_call lib/thread.c:1531
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #10 0x657037 in frr_run lib/libfrr.c:1052
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #11 0x42d268 in main bgpd/bgp_main.c:486
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #12 0x7f806032482f in __libc_start_main (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x2082f)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #13 0x42bcc8 in _start (/usr/lib/frr/bgpd+0x42bcc8)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Address 0x7ffdd425b060 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 240 in frame
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #0 0x483945 in bgp_nlri_parse_vpn bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c:103
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  This frame has 5 object(s):
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [32, 36) 'label'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [96, 108) 'rd_as'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [160, 172) 'rd_ip'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [224, 240) 'prd' <== Memory access at offset 240 overflows this variable
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [288, 336) 'p'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom stack unwind mechanism or swapcontext
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	      (longjmp and C++ exceptions *are* supported)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow lib/prefix.c:776 prefix_cmp
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f3 f3 f3 f3 f3 f3
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435d0: f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435f0: f1 f1 04 f4 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 04 f4 f4 f2 f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	=>0x10003a843600: f2 f2 00 04 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00[f4]f4 f2 f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843610: f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 00 f4 f4 f3 f3 f3 f3 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843620: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843630: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 02 f4
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843640: f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 04 f4 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843650: f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00 00 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Addressable:           00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Heap left redzone:       fa
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Heap right redzone:      fb
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Freed heap region:       fd
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack left redzone:      f1
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack mid redzone:       f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack right redzone:     f3
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack partial redzone:   f4
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack after return:      f5
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack use after scope:   f8
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Global redzone:          f9
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Global init order:       f6
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Poisoned by user:        f7
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Container overflow:      fc
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Array cookie:            ac
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Intra object redzone:    bb
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  ASan internal:           fe
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:36	r3: Daemon bgpd not running

This is the result of this code pattern in rfapi/rfapi_import.c:

prefix_cmp((struct prefix *)&bpi_result->extra->vnc.import.rd,
	   (struct prefix *)prd))

Effectively prd or vnc.import.rd are `struct prefix_rd` which
are being typecast to a `struct prefix`.  Not a big deal except commit
1315d74 modified the prefix_cmp
function to allow for a sorted prefix_cmp.  In prefix_cmp
we were looking at the offset and shift.  In the case
of vnc we were passing a prefix length of 64 which is the exact length of
the remaining data structure for struct prefix_rd.  So we calculated
a offset of 8 and a shift of 0.  The data structures for the prefix
portion happened to be equal to 64 bits of data. So we checked that
with the memcmp got a 0 and promptly read off the end of the data
structure for the numcmp.  The fix is if shift is 0 that means thei
the memcmp has checked everything and there is nothing to do.

Please note: We will still crash if we set the prefixlen > then
~312 bits currently( ie if the prefixlen specifies a bit length
longer than the prefix length ).  I do not think there is
anything to do here( nor am I sure how to correct this either )
as that we are going to have some severe problems when we muck
up the prefixlen.

Fixes: #5025
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com>
mjstapp pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2019
Our Address Sanitizer CI is finding this issue:
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	r4: bgpd triggered an exception by AddressSanitizer
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7ffdd425b060 at pc 0x00000068575f bp 0x7ffdd4258550 sp 0x7ffdd4258540
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	READ of size 1 at 0x7ffdd425b060 thread T0
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #0 0x68575e in prefix_cmp lib/prefix.c:776
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #1 0x5889f5 in rfapiItBiIndexSearch bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:2230
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #2 0x5889f5 in rfapiBgpInfoFilteredImportVPN bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:3520
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #3 0x58b909 in rfapiProcessWithdraw bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:4071
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #4 0x4c459b in bgp_withdraw bgpd/bgp_route.c:3736
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #5 0x484122 in bgp_nlri_parse_vpn bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c:237
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #6 0x497f52 in bgp_nlri_parse bgpd/bgp_packet.c:315
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #7 0x49d06d in bgp_update_receive bgpd/bgp_packet.c:1598
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #8 0x49d06d in bgp_process_packet bgpd/bgp_packet.c:2274
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #9 0x6b9f54 in thread_call lib/thread.c:1531
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #10 0x657037 in frr_run lib/libfrr.c:1052
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #11 0x42d268 in main bgpd/bgp_main.c:486
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #12 0x7f806032482f in __libc_start_main (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x2082f)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #13 0x42bcc8 in _start (/usr/lib/frr/bgpd+0x42bcc8)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Address 0x7ffdd425b060 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 240 in frame
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #0 0x483945 in bgp_nlri_parse_vpn bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c:103
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  This frame has 5 object(s):
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [32, 36) 'label'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [96, 108) 'rd_as'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [160, 172) 'rd_ip'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [224, 240) 'prd' <== Memory access at offset 240 overflows this variable
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [288, 336) 'p'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom stack unwind mechanism or swapcontext
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	      (longjmp and C++ exceptions *are* supported)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow lib/prefix.c:776 prefix_cmp
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f3 f3 f3 f3 f3 f3
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435d0: f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435f0: f1 f1 04 f4 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 04 f4 f4 f2 f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	=>0x10003a843600: f2 f2 00 04 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00[f4]f4 f2 f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843610: f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 00 f4 f4 f3 f3 f3 f3 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843620: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843630: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 02 f4
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843640: f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 04 f4 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843650: f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00 00 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Addressable:           00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Heap left redzone:       fa
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Heap right redzone:      fb
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Freed heap region:       fd
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack left redzone:      f1
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack mid redzone:       f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack right redzone:     f3
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack partial redzone:   f4
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack after return:      f5
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack use after scope:   f8
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Global redzone:          f9
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Global init order:       f6
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Poisoned by user:        f7
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Container overflow:      fc
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Array cookie:            ac
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Intra object redzone:    bb
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  ASan internal:           fe
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:36	r3: Daemon bgpd not running

This is the result of this code pattern in rfapi/rfapi_import.c:

prefix_cmp((struct prefix *)&bpi_result->extra->vnc.import.rd,
	   (struct prefix *)prd))

Effectively prd or vnc.import.rd are `struct prefix_rd` which
are being typecast to a `struct prefix`.  Not a big deal except commit
1315d74 modified the prefix_cmp
function to allow for a sorted prefix_cmp.  In prefix_cmp
we were looking at the offset and shift.  In the case
of vnc we were passing a prefix length of 64 which is the exact length of
the remaining data structure for struct prefix_rd.  So we calculated
a offset of 8 and a shift of 0.  The data structures for the prefix
portion happened to be equal to 64 bits of data. So we checked that
with the memcmp got a 0 and promptly read off the end of the data
structure for the numcmp.  The fix is if shift is 0 that means thei
the memcmp has checked everything and there is nothing to do.

Please note: We will still crash if we set the prefixlen > then
~312 bits currently( ie if the prefixlen specifies a bit length
longer than the prefix length ).  I do not think there is
anything to do here( nor am I sure how to correct this either )
as that we are going to have some severe problems when we muck
up the prefixlen.

Fixes: #5025
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com>
SumitAgarwal123 pushed a commit to SumitAgarwal123/frr that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2019
Our Address Sanitizer CI is finding this issue:
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	r4: bgpd triggered an exception by AddressSanitizer
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7ffdd425b060 at pc 0x00000068575f bp 0x7ffdd4258550 sp 0x7ffdd4258540
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	READ of size 1 at 0x7ffdd425b060 thread T0
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #0 0x68575e in prefix_cmp lib/prefix.c:776
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#1 0x5889f5 in rfapiItBiIndexSearch bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:2230
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#2 0x5889f5 in rfapiBgpInfoFilteredImportVPN bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:3520
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#3 0x58b909 in rfapiProcessWithdraw bgpd/rfapi/rfapi_import.c:4071
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#4 0x4c459b in bgp_withdraw bgpd/bgp_route.c:3736
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#5 0x484122 in bgp_nlri_parse_vpn bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c:237
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#6 0x497f52 in bgp_nlri_parse bgpd/bgp_packet.c:315
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#7 0x49d06d in bgp_update_receive bgpd/bgp_packet.c:1598
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#8 0x49d06d in bgp_process_packet bgpd/bgp_packet.c:2274
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#9 0x6b9f54 in thread_call lib/thread.c:1531
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#10 0x657037 in frr_run lib/libfrr.c:1052
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#11 0x42d268 in main bgpd/bgp_main.c:486
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#12 0x7f806032482f in __libc_start_main (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x2082f)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    FRRouting#13 0x42bcc8 in _start (/usr/lib/frr/bgpd+0x42bcc8)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Address 0x7ffdd425b060 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 240 in frame
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    #0 0x483945 in bgp_nlri_parse_vpn bgpd/bgp_mplsvpn.c:103
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  This frame has 5 object(s):
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [32, 36) 'label'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [96, 108) 'rd_as'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [160, 172) 'rd_ip'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [224, 240) 'prd' <== Memory access at offset 240 overflows this variable
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	    [288, 336) 'p'
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom stack unwind mechanism or swapcontext
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	      (longjmp and C++ exceptions *are* supported)
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow lib/prefix.c:776 prefix_cmp
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f3 f3 f3 f3 f3 f3
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435d0: f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a8435f0: f1 f1 04 f4 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 04 f4 f4 f2 f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	=>0x10003a843600: f2 f2 00 04 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00[f4]f4 f2 f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843610: f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 00 f4 f4 f3 f3 f3 f3 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843620: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843630: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 02 f4
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843640: f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 04 f4 f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  0x10003a843650: f4 f4 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00 00 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Addressable:           00
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Heap left redzone:       fa
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Heap right redzone:      fb
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Freed heap region:       fd
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack left redzone:      f1
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack mid redzone:       f2
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack right redzone:     f3
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack partial redzone:   f4
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack after return:      f5
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Stack use after scope:   f8
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Global redzone:          f9
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Global init order:       f6
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Poisoned by user:        f7
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Container overflow:      fc
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Array cookie:            ac
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  Intra object redzone:    bb
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:33	  ASan internal:           fe
error	09-Oct-2019 19:28:36	r3: Daemon bgpd not running

This is the result of this code pattern in rfapi/rfapi_import.c:

prefix_cmp((struct prefix *)&bpi_result->extra->vnc.import.rd,
	   (struct prefix *)prd))

Effectively prd or vnc.import.rd are `struct prefix_rd` which
are being typecast to a `struct prefix`.  Not a big deal except commit
1315d74 modified the prefix_cmp
function to allow for a sorted prefix_cmp.  In prefix_cmp
we were looking at the offset and shift.  In the case
of vnc we were passing a prefix length of 64 which is the exact length of
the remaining data structure for struct prefix_rd.  So we calculated
a offset of 8 and a shift of 0.  The data structures for the prefix
portion happened to be equal to 64 bits of data. So we checked that
with the memcmp got a 0 and promptly read off the end of the data
structure for the numcmp.  The fix is if shift is 0 that means thei
the memcmp has checked everything and there is nothing to do.

Please note: We will still crash if we set the prefixlen > then
~312 bits currently( ie if the prefixlen specifies a bit length
longer than the prefix length ).  I do not think there is
anything to do here( nor am I sure how to correct this either )
as that we are going to have some severe problems when we muck
up the prefixlen.

Fixes: FRRouting#5025
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com>
@abdosi abdosi mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2025
2 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant