(unknown)
As suggested by pavel i tested how e2fsck handles corrupted images, I used the fuzzer bunny (http://code.google.com/p/bunny-the-fuzzer/)
At http://www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/e2fsck_err.tar.bz2 you can find a bunch of images crashing e2fsck or keeping it in an endless loop. I tested with e2fsck 1.41.0 which was the one i had at hand.
The crashes are either in ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2() or ext2fs_read_inode_full(), looks like those are always the same faults.
000 endless loop
000 endless loop
053 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
054 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
073 different endless loop?
086 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
112 ext2fs_read_inode_full
139 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
143 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
161 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
192 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
209 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
214 endless loop
216 ext2fs_read_inode_full
241 endless loop
266 endless loop
303 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
389 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
438 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
440 endless loop
446 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
449 ext2fs_read_inode_full
451 ext2fs_read_inode_full
455 ext2fs_read_inode_full
518 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
530 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
534 ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2
Greetings, Eric
Re: e2fsck faults with corrupted images
Quoted 9 lines · * Eric Sesterhenn ([email protected]) wrote:
As suggested by pavel i tested how e2fsck handles corrupted images, I used the fuzzer bunny (http://code.google.com/p/bunny-the-fuzzer/)
At http://www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/e2fsck_err.tar.bz2 you can find a bunch of images crashing e2fsck or keeping it in an endless loop. I tested with e2fsck 1.41.0 which was the one i had at hand.The crashes are either in
ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2()orext2fs_read_inode_full(), looks like those are always the same faults.
I just tried again with e2sck 1.41.3 and I can still produce the errors.
Greetings, Eric
Re: e2fsck faults with corrupted images
Quoted 10 lines · Eric Sesterhenn
Quoted 9 lines · * Eric Sesterhenn ([email protected]) wrote:
As suggested by pavel i tested how e2fsck handles corrupted images, I used the fuzzer bunny (http://code.google.com/p/bunny-the-fuzzer/)
At http://www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/e2fsck_err.tar.bz2 you can find a bunch of images crashing e2fsck or keeping it in an endless loop. I tested with e2fsck 1.41.0 which was the one i had at hand.The crashes are either in
ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2()orext2fs_read_inode_full(), looks like those are always the same faults.
Thanks, they were all traced to the superblock parameter s_first_ino being extremely large --- much larger than s_inodes_count. I've committed the following patches to address the problem at multiple levels.
- Ted
PATCH 1/1 e2fsck: Add superblock check to make sure s_first_ino is valid
An deliberately corrupted filesystem with an insanely large s_first_ino field could cause e2fsck to crash with a seg fault.
Thanks to Eric Sesterhenn for supplying test cases which demonstrated this issue.
--- e2fsck/super.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
e2fsck/super.c +4 -0
@@ -513,6 +513,10 @@ void check_super_block(e2fsck_t ctx)check_super_value (ctx,"reserved_gdt_blocks" , sb->s_reserved_gdt_blocks,MAX_CHECK ,0 , fs->blocksize/4 ); +if (sb->s_rev_level >EXT2_GOOD_OLD_REV ) +check_super_value (ctx,"first_ino" , sb->s_first_ino, +MIN_CHECK |MAX_CHECK , +EXT2_GOOD_OLD_FIRST_INO , sb->s_inodes_count); inode_size =EXT2_INODE_SIZE (sb); check_super_value(ctx, "inode_size", inode_size, MIN_CHECK | MAX_CHECK,
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 ext2fs_new_inode(): Add sanity check to assure a valid inode number
Add a sanity check to makesure that even if the superblock field s_first_inode is insane, that we won't return an invalid inode number. (The function will return the error EXT2_ET_INODE_ALLOC_FAIL in that case.)
--- lib/ext2fs/alloc.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
lib/ext2fs/alloc.c +2 -0
@@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ errcode_t ext2fs_new_inode(ext2_filsys fs, ext2_ino_t dir, start_inode = (dir_group *EXT2_INODES_PER_GROUP (fs->super)) +1 ;if (start_inode <EXT2_FIRST_INODE (fs->super)) start_inode =EXT2_FIRST_INODE (fs->super); +if (start_inode > fs->super->s_inodes_count) +return EXT2_ET_INODE_ALLOC_FAIL ; i = start_inode; do {
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 libext2fs: Add sanity checks to ext2fs_{block,inode}_alloc_stats
If ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2() or ext2fs_block_alloc_stats() is passed an insanely large inode or block number, it's possible for these functions to overrun an array boundary and cause the calling program to crash with a memory error.
Detect this case, and since these functions don't return an error code, print a warning message, much like we do in ext2fs_warn_bitmap2().
--- lib/ext2fs/alloc_stats.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
lib/ext2fs/alloc_stats.c +14 -0
@@ -20,6 +20,13 @@ void ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2(ext2_filsys fs, ext2_ino_t ino, {int group =ext2fs_group_of_ino (fs, ino); +#ifndef OMIT_COM_ERR +if (ino > fs->super->s_inodes_count) { +com_err ("ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2" ,0 , +"Illegal inode number: %lu" , ino); +return ; + } +#endif if (inuse >0 )ext2fs_mark_inode_bitmap (fs->inode_map, ino);else
@@ -58,6 +65,13 @@ void ext2fs_block_alloc_stats(ext2_filsys fs, blk_t blk, int inuse) {int group =ext2fs_group_of_blk (fs, blk); +#ifndef OMIT_COM_ERR +if (blk >= fs->super->s_blocks_count) { +com_err ("ext2fs_block_alloc_stats2" ,0 , +"Illegal block number: %lu" , blk); +return ; + } +#endif if (inuse >0 )ext2fs_mark_block_bitmap (fs->block_map, blk);else
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 e2fsck: Change PR_3_CREATE_LPF_ERROR to be a non-fatal problem
The other problem codes associated with failing to create the lost+found directory are non-fatal, and this one should be non-fatal as well. The two places which call e2fsck_get_lost_and_found() already deal with a failure to create the directory, so there's no point making this be a fatal error.
--- e2fsck/problem.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
e2fsck/problem.c +1 -1
@@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ static struct e2fsck_problem problem_table[] = {/* Error creating lost and found directory */ {PR_3_CREATE_LPF_ERROR ,N_ ("Error creating /@l @d (%s): %m\n" ), - PROMPT_NONE, PR_FATAL }, + PROMPT_NONE, 0 },/* Root inode is not directory; aborting */ { PR_3_ROOT_NOT_DIR_ABORT,
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 e2fsck: Add superblock check to make sure s_first_ino is valid
In reply to Theodore TsoAn deliberately corrupted filesystem with an insanely large s_first_ino field could cause e2fsck to crash with a seg fault.
Thanks to Eric Sesterhenn for supplying test cases which demonstrated this issue.
--- e2fsck/super.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
e2fsck/super.c +4 -0
@@ -513,6 +513,10 @@ void check_super_block(e2fsck_t ctx)check_super_value (ctx,"reserved_gdt_blocks" , sb->s_reserved_gdt_blocks,MAX_CHECK ,0 , fs->blocksize/4 ); +if (sb->s_rev_level >EXT2_GOOD_OLD_REV ) +check_super_value (ctx,"first_ino" , sb->s_first_ino, +MIN_CHECK |MAX_CHECK , +EXT2_GOOD_OLD_FIRST_INO , sb->s_inodes_count); inode_size =EXT2_INODE_SIZE (sb); check_super_value(ctx, "inode_size", inode_size, MIN_CHECK | MAX_CHECK,
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 ext2fs_new_inode(): Add sanity check to assure a valid inode number
Add a sanity check to makesure that even if the superblock field s_first_inode is insane, that we won't return an invalid inode number. (The function will return the error EXT2_ET_INODE_ALLOC_FAIL in that case.)
--- lib/ext2fs/alloc.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
lib/ext2fs/alloc.c +2 -0
@@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ errcode_t ext2fs_new_inode(ext2_filsys fs, ext2_ino_t dir, start_inode = (dir_group *EXT2_INODES_PER_GROUP (fs->super)) +1 ;if (start_inode <EXT2_FIRST_INODE (fs->super)) start_inode =EXT2_FIRST_INODE (fs->super); +if (start_inode > fs->super->s_inodes_count) +return EXT2_ET_INODE_ALLOC_FAIL ; i = start_inode; do {
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 libext2fs: Add sanity checks to ext2fs_{block,inode}_alloc_stats
If ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2() or ext2fs_block_alloc_stats() is passed an insanely large inode or block number, it's possible for these functions to overrun an array boundary and cause the calling program to crash with a memory error.
Detect this case, and since these functions don't return an error code, print a warning message, much like we do in ext2fs_warn_bitmap2().
--- lib/ext2fs/alloc_stats.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
lib/ext2fs/alloc_stats.c +14 -0
@@ -20,6 +20,13 @@ void ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2(ext2_filsys fs, ext2_ino_t ino, {int group =ext2fs_group_of_ino (fs, ino); +#ifndef OMIT_COM_ERR +if (ino > fs->super->s_inodes_count) { +com_err ("ext2fs_inode_alloc_stats2" ,0 , +"Illegal inode number: %lu" , ino); +return ; + } +#endif if (inuse >0 )ext2fs_mark_inode_bitmap (fs->inode_map, ino);else
@@ -58,6 +65,13 @@ void ext2fs_block_alloc_stats(ext2_filsys fs, blk_t blk, int inuse) {int group =ext2fs_group_of_blk (fs, blk); +#ifndef OMIT_COM_ERR +if (blk >= fs->super->s_blocks_count) { +com_err ("ext2fs_block_alloc_stats2" ,0 , +"Illegal block number: %lu" , blk); +return ; + } +#endif if (inuse >0 )ext2fs_mark_block_bitmap (fs->block_map, blk);else
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty
PATCH 1/1 e2fsck: Change PR_3_CREATE_LPF_ERROR to be a non-fatal problem
The other problem codes associated with failing to create the lost+found directory are non-fatal, and this one should be non-fatal as well. The two places which call e2fsck_get_lost_and_found() already deal with a failure to create the directory, so there's no point making this be a fatal error.
--- e2fsck/problem.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
e2fsck/problem.c +1 -1
@@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ static struct e2fsck_problem problem_table[] = {/* Error creating lost and found directory */ {PR_3_CREATE_LPF_ERROR ,N_ ("Error creating /@l @d (%s): %m\n" ), - PROMPT_NONE, PR_FATAL }, + PROMPT_NONE, 0 },/* Root inode is not directory; aborting */ { PR_3_ROOT_NOT_DIR_ABORT,
Signature · 1 line
1.6.0.4.8.g36f27.dirty