mirror of
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc.git
synced 2024-11-21 13:40:47 +00:00
4bfae8a6f3
As requested by the Debian security team. * SECURITY.txt: Remove Debian.
205 lines
9.0 KiB
Plaintext
205 lines
9.0 KiB
Plaintext
What is a GCC security bug?
|
|
===========================
|
|
|
|
A security bug is one that threatens the security of a system or
|
|
network, or might compromise the security of data stored on it.
|
|
In the context of GCC, there are multiple ways in which this might
|
|
happen and some common scenarios are detailed below.
|
|
|
|
If you're reporting a security issue and feel like it does not fit
|
|
into any of the descriptions below, you're encouraged to reach out
|
|
through the GCC bugzilla or, if needed, privately, by following the
|
|
instructions in the last two sections of this document.
|
|
|
|
Compiler drivers, programs, libgccjit and support libraries
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
The compiler driver processes source code, invokes other programs
|
|
such as the assembler and linker and generates the output result,
|
|
which may be assembly code or machine code. Compiling untrusted
|
|
sources can result in arbitrary code execution and unconstrained
|
|
resource consumption in the compiler. As a result, compilation of
|
|
such code should be done inside a sandboxed environment to ensure
|
|
that it does not compromise the host environment.
|
|
|
|
The libgccjit library can, despite the name, be used both for
|
|
ahead-of-time compilation and for just-in-compilation. In both
|
|
cases, it can be used to translate input representations (such as
|
|
source code) in the application context; in the latter case, the
|
|
generated code is also run in the application context.
|
|
|
|
Limitations that apply to the compiler driver apply here too in
|
|
terms of trusting inputs and it is recommended that both the
|
|
compilation *and* execution context of the code are appropriately
|
|
sandboxed to contain the effects of any bugs in libgccjit, the
|
|
application code using it, or its generated code to the sandboxed
|
|
environment.
|
|
|
|
Libraries such as libiberty, libcc1 and libcpp are not distributed
|
|
for runtime support and have similar challenges to compiler drivers.
|
|
While they are expected to be robust against arbitrary input, they
|
|
should only be used with trusted inputs when linked into the
|
|
compiler.
|
|
|
|
Libraries such as zlib that are bundled with GCC to build it will be
|
|
treated the same as the compiler drivers and programs as far as
|
|
security coverage is concerned. However, if you find an issue in
|
|
these libraries independent of their use in GCC, you should reach
|
|
out to their upstream projects to report them.
|
|
|
|
As a result, the only case for a potential security issue in the
|
|
compiler is when it generates vulnerable application code for
|
|
trusted input source code that is conforming to the relevant
|
|
programming standard or extensions documented as supported by GCC
|
|
and the algorithm expressed in the source code does not have the
|
|
vulnerability. The output application code could be considered
|
|
vulnerable if it produces an actual vulnerability in the target
|
|
application, for example:
|
|
|
|
- The application dereferences an invalid memory location despite
|
|
the application sources being valid.
|
|
- The application reads from or writes to a valid but incorrect
|
|
memory location, resulting in an information integrity issue or an
|
|
information leak.
|
|
- The application ends up running in an infinite loop or with
|
|
severe degradation in performance despite the input sources having
|
|
no such issue, resulting in a Denial of Service. Note that
|
|
correct but non-performant code is not a security issue candidate,
|
|
this only applies to incorrect code that may result in performance
|
|
degradation severe enough to amount to a denial of service.
|
|
- The application crashes due to the generated incorrect code,
|
|
resulting in a Denial of Service.
|
|
|
|
Language runtime libraries
|
|
--------------------------
|
|
|
|
GCC also builds and distributes libraries that are intended to be
|
|
used widely to implement runtime support for various programming
|
|
languages. These include the following:
|
|
|
|
* libada
|
|
* libatomic
|
|
* libbacktrace
|
|
* libcc1
|
|
* libcody
|
|
* libcpp
|
|
* libdecnumber
|
|
* libffi
|
|
* libgcc
|
|
* libgfortran
|
|
* libgm2
|
|
* libgo
|
|
* libgomp
|
|
* libitm
|
|
* libobjc
|
|
* libphobos
|
|
* libquadmath
|
|
* libssp
|
|
* libstdc++
|
|
|
|
These libraries are intended to be used in arbitrary contexts and, as
|
|
a result, bugs in these libraries may be evaluated for security
|
|
impact. However, some of these libraries, e.g. libgo, libphobos,
|
|
etc. are not maintained in the GCC project, due to which the GCC
|
|
project may not be the correct point of contact for them. You are
|
|
encouraged to look at README files within those library directories
|
|
to locate the canonical security contact point for those projects
|
|
and include them in the report. Once the issue is fixed in the
|
|
upstream project, the fix will be synced into GCC in a future
|
|
release.
|
|
|
|
Most security vulnerabilities in these runtime libraries arise when
|
|
an application uses functionality in a specific way. As a result,
|
|
not all bugs qualify as security relevant. The following guidelines
|
|
can help with the decision:
|
|
|
|
- Buffer overflows and integer overflows should be treated as
|
|
security issues if it is conceivable that the data triggering them
|
|
can come from an untrusted source.
|
|
- Bugs that cause memory corruption which is likely exploitable
|
|
should be treated as security bugs.
|
|
- Information disclosure can be security bugs, especially if
|
|
exposure through applications can be determined.
|
|
- Memory leaks and races are security bugs if they cause service
|
|
breakage.
|
|
- Stack overflow through unbounded alloca calls or variable-length
|
|
arrays are security bugs if it is conceivable that the data
|
|
triggering the overflow could come from an untrusted source.
|
|
- Stack overflow through deep recursion and other crashes are
|
|
security bugs if they cause service breakage.
|
|
- Bugs that cripple the whole system (so that it doesn't even boot
|
|
or does not run most applications) are not security bugs because
|
|
they will not be exploitable in practice, due to general system
|
|
instability.
|
|
|
|
Diagnostic libraries
|
|
--------------------
|
|
|
|
Libraries like libvtv and the sanitizers are intended to be used in
|
|
diagnostic cases and not intended for use in sensitive environments.
|
|
As a result, bugs in these libraries will not be considered security
|
|
sensitive.
|
|
|
|
GCC plugins
|
|
-----------
|
|
|
|
It should be noted that GCC may execute arbitrary code loaded by a
|
|
user through the GCC plugin mechanism or through system preloading
|
|
mechanism. Such custom code should be vetted by the user for safety,
|
|
as bugs exposed through such code will not be considered security
|
|
issues.
|
|
|
|
Security features implemented in GCC
|
|
------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
GCC implements a number of security features that reduce the impact
|
|
of security issues in applications, such as -fstack-protector,
|
|
-fstack-clash-protection, _FORTIFY_SOURCE and so on. A failure of
|
|
these features to function perfectly in all situations is not a
|
|
vulnerability in itself since it does not affect the correctness of
|
|
programs. Further, they're dependent on heuristics and may not
|
|
always have full coverage for protection.
|
|
|
|
Similarly, GCC may transform code in a way that the correctness of
|
|
the expressed algorithm is preserved, but supplementary properties
|
|
that are not specifically expressible in a high-level language
|
|
are not preserved. Examples of such supplementary properties
|
|
include absence of sensitive data in the program's address space
|
|
after an attempt to wipe it, or data-independent timing of code.
|
|
When the source code attempts to express such properties, failure
|
|
to preserve them in resulting machine code is not a security issue
|
|
in GCC.
|
|
|
|
Reporting private security bugs
|
|
===============================
|
|
|
|
*All bugs reported in the GCC Bugzilla are public.*
|
|
|
|
In order to report a private security bug that is not immediately
|
|
public, please contact one of the downstream distributions with
|
|
security teams. The following teams have volunteered to handle
|
|
such bugs:
|
|
|
|
Red Hat: secalert@redhat.com
|
|
SUSE: security@suse.de
|
|
AdaCore: product-security@adacore.com
|
|
|
|
Please report the bug to just one of these teams. It will be shared
|
|
with other teams as necessary.
|
|
|
|
The team contacted will take care of details such as vulnerability
|
|
rating and CVE assignment (http://cve.mitre.org/about/). It is likely
|
|
that the team will ask to file a public bug because the issue is
|
|
sufficiently minor and does not warrant an embargo. An embargo is not
|
|
a requirement for being credited with the discovery of a security
|
|
vulnerability.
|
|
|
|
Reporting public security bugs
|
|
==============================
|
|
|
|
It is expected that critical security bugs will be rare, and that most
|
|
security bugs can be reported in GCC, thus making
|
|
them public immediately. The system can be found here:
|
|
|
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
|