When performing pointer arithmetic, the size of the value to add to a pointer is automatically scaled to the size of the type of the pointed-to object. For instance, when adding a value to the byte address of a 4-byte integer, the value is scaled by a factor of 4 and then added to the pointer. Failing to understand how pointer arithmetic works can lead to miscalculations that result in serious errors, such as buffer overflows.
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example, integer values returned by parseint(getdata())
are stored into an array of INTBUFSIZE
elements of type int
called buf
[Dowd 2006]. If data is available for insertion into buf
(which is indicated by havedata()
) and buf_ptr
has not been incremented past buf + sizeof(buf)
, an integer value is stored at the address referenced by buf_ptr
. However, the sizeof
operator returns the total number of bytes in buf
, which is typically a multiple of the number of elements in buf
. This value is scaled to the size of an integer and added to buf
. As a result, the check to make sure integers are not written past the end of buf
is incorrect and a buffer overflow is possible.
int buf[INTBUFSIZE]; int *buf_ptr = buf; while (havedata() && buf_ptr < (buf + sizeof(buf))) { *buf_ptr++ = parseint(getdata()); }
Compliant Solution
In this compliant solution, the size of buf
, INTBUFSIZE
is added directly to buf
and used as an upper bound. The integer literal INTBUFSIZE
is scaled to the size of an integer, and the upper bound of buf
is checked correctly.
int buf[INTBUFSIZE]; int *buf_ptr = buf; while (havedata() && buf_ptr < (buf + INTBUFSIZE)) { *buf_ptr++ = parseint(getdata()); }
An arguably better solution is to use the address of the nonexistent element following the end of the array, as follows:
int buf[INTBUFSIZE]; int *buf_ptr = buf; while (havedata() && buf_ptr < &buf[INTBUFSIZE] { *buf_ptr++ = parseint(getdata()); }
This works because the C standard guarantees the address of buf[INTBUFSIZE]
even though no such element exists.
Noncompliant Code Example
The following example is based on a flaw in the OpenBSD operating system. An integer, skip
, is added as an offset to a pointer of type struct big
. The adjusted pointer is then used as a destination address in a call to memset()
. However, when skip
is added to the struct big
pointer, it is automatically scaled by the size of struct big
, which is 32 bytes (assuming 4-byte integers, 8-byte long long integers, and no structure padding). This results in the call to memset()
writing to unintended memory.
struct big { unsigned long long ull_1; /* typically 8 bytes */ unsigned long long ull_2; /* typically 8 bytes */ unsigned long long ull_3; /* typically 8 bytes */ int si_4; /* typically 4 bytes */ int si_5; /* typically 4 bytes */ }; /* ... */ size_t skip = offsetof(struct big, ull_2); struct big *s = (struct big *)malloc(sizeof(struct big)); if (!s) { /* Handle malloc() error */ } memset(s + skip, 0, sizeof(struct big) - skip); /* ... */ free(s); s = NULL;
A similar situation occurred in OpenBSD's make
command [Murenin 2007].
Compliant Solution
To correct this example, the struct big
pointer is cast as a char *
. This causes skip
to be scaled by a factor of 1.
struct big { unsigned long long ull_1; /* typically 8 bytes */ unsigned long long ull_2; /* typically 8 bytes */ unsigned long long ull_3; /* typically 8 bytes */ int si_4; /* typically 4 bytes */ int si_5; /* typically 4 bytes */ }; /* ... */ size_t skip = offsetof(struct big, ull_2); struct big *s = (struct big *)malloc(sizeof(struct big)); if (!s) { /* Handle malloc() error */ } memset((char *)s + skip, 0, sizeof(struct big) - skip); /* ... */ free(s); s = NULL;
Risk Assessment
Failure to understand and properly use pointer arithmetic can allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code.
Recommendation | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
EXP08-C | high | probable | high | P6 | L2 |
Automated Detection
Tool | Version | Checker | Description |
---|---|---|---|
9.7.1 | 45 D | Partially implemented | |
PRQA QA-C | Unable to render {include} The included page could not be found. | 2930 | Partially Implemented
|
How long is 4 yards plus 3 feet? It is obvious from elementary arithmetic that any answer involving 7 is wrong, as the student did not take the units into account. The right method is to convert both numbers to reflect the same units.
The examples in this rule reflect both a correct and an incorrect way to handle comparisons of numbers representing different things (either single bytes or multibyte data structures). The noncompliant examples just add the numbers without regard to units, whereas the compliant solutions use type casts to convert one number to the appropriate unit of the other number.
ROSE can catch both noncompliant examples by searching for pointer arithmetic expressions involving different units. The "different units" is the tricky part, but you can try to identify an expression's units using some simple heuristics:
- A pointer to a
foo
object hasfoo
as the unit. - A pointer to
char *
has byte as the unit. - Any
sizeof
oroffsetof
expression also has unit byte as the unit. - Any variable used in an index to an array of
foo
objects (e.g.,foo[variable]
) hasfoo
as the unit.
In addition to pointer arithmetic expressions, you can also hunt for array index expressions, as array[index]
is merely shorthand for "array + index
."
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
Related Guidelines
CERT C++ Secure Coding Standard | EXP08-CPP. Ensure pointer arithmetic is used correctly |
---|---|
ISO/IEC TR 17961 | (Draft) Adding or subtracting a byte count to an element pointer [cntradd] |
ISO/IEC TR 24772 | Pointer casting and pointer type changes [HFC] Pointer arithmetic [RVG] |
MISRA-C | Rule 17.1 (required): Pointer arithmetic shall only be applied to pointers that address an array or array element Rule 17.2 (required): Pointer subtraction shall only be applied to pointers that address elements of the same array Rule 17.3 (required): > , >= , < , <= shall not be applied to pointer types except where they point to the same arrayRule 17.4 (required): Array indexing shall be the only allowed form of pointer arithmetic |
MITRE CWE | CWE-468, Incorrect pointer scaling |
Bibliography
[Dowd 2006] | Chapter 6, "C Language Issues" |
[Murenin 2007] |