30 days of bugs: Day 7
Welcome to "30 Days of Bugs," a campaign by 3Flatline, a startup that's all about making code safer. Our product, the Dixie Code Scanner, enabled by AI and machine learning (but also lots of normal and boring regular processes) to catch vulnerabilities that other tools miss. It doesn’t just find bugs—it also suggests fixes and writes test code to see if those vulnerabilities can be exploited. We're sharing a new bug every day from open-source projects to show just how powerful the Dixie Code Scanner is. These are real bugs that other tools didn't catch, highlighting that our scanner can make a real difference for developers and security researchers.
This is real output from our code scanner, minus the “tests” or code to help exploit the vulnerability (for obvious reasons). One day, we hope that we can stop prioritizing bugs based on CVEs and just automatically fix security vulnerabilities. Until then, we leverage the below output to reduce the amount of time you spend validating false positives or figuring out what your scanner is telling you.
And yes, for all you sneaky researchers out there: we have an offline version including LLM that can be run locally, or deploy into your tenant to keep you code secret and safe.
If you want to learn more, check out https://3flatline.ai or reach out to me here on LinkedIn. I’m happy to talk or give out free trial codes!
Today’s bug showcases Dixie's ability to work on assembly languages and comes from . . .
Buffer Overflow in wifi driver in Mircotik routerOS.
File:
routeros-7.15.3-arm64/fileSystem/bndl/wifi/nova/bin/ww2
Code Description:
The code is a function named sub_cbbe4 that takes five parameters: two integers (`arg1`, arg2), a character pointer (`arg3`), a void pointer (`arg4`), and another integer (`arg5`). The function appears to perform a series of operations that involve manipulating data, making function calls, and handling conditional logic based on the values of its arguments.
The function begins by saving the state of several registers and initializing local variables. It then calls other functions (`sub_9f930`, sub_9fa28, sub_9fb98, etc.) to perform specific tasks, likely related to processing or transforming data based on the input parameters. The function also includes various conditional checks that determine the flow of execution, such as comparing values and branching to different sections of code based on the results.
领英推荐
Throughout its execution, the function manipulates data stored in memory, including reading and writing to the stack and using pointers to access specific data structures. It appears to be involved in a larger system, possibly related to cryptographic operations or data processing, given the context of the function names and the types of operations performed.
The function concludes by restoring the saved register state and returning a value, which is likely an indication of success or failure based on the operations performed. Overall, sub_cbbe4 is a complex function that integrates multiple operations and conditional logic to achieve its intended functionality.
Vuln Class: Buffer Overflow
Summary:
000cbc94 3f0000ea b 0xcbd98
000cbda0 10309de5 ldr r3, [sp, #0x10] {var_40}
000cbda4 000053e3 cmp r3, #0
000cbda8 4700001a bne 0xcbecc
The code snippet contains a potential buffer overflow vulnerability due to the manipulation of stack space without proper bounds checking. The instruction at 000cbda0 loads a value from the stack into register r3, which is then compared to zero. If the value in r3 exceeds the allocated stack space, it can lead to writing beyond the bounds of the stack, causing a buffer overflow. This can be exploited by an attacker to overwrite critical data on the stack, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution or a crash. The vulnerability arises from the lack of validation on the size of the data being processed, which can be exploited by providing crafted input that exceeds expected limits.
Assessment:
Report: True
Confidence Level: Medium confidence.
The report accurately identifies a potential buffer overflow due to stack manipulation without proper bounds checking. The analysis of the instruction at 000cbda0 highlights the risk of exceeding allocated stack space, which aligns with common vulnerabilities associated with stack overflows. However, the specific details of how the overflow could be exploited would require further context regarding the data being processed and the overall function behavior.