forked from llvm/llvm-project
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Taint improvement #1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
dkrupp
wants to merge
1
commit into
main
Choose a base branch
from
taint_improvement
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
This reverts commit d768b97. Causes sanitizer failure: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/238/builds/1114 ``` /b/sanitizer-aarch64-linux-bootstrap-ubsan/build/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Support/xxhash.cpp:107:12: runtime error: applying non-zero offset 8 to null pointer #0 0xaaaab28ec6c8 in llvm::xxHash64(llvm::StringRef) /b/sanitizer-aarch64-linux-bootstrap-ubsan/build/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Support/xxhash.cpp:107:12 #1 0xaaaab28cbd38 in llvm::StringMapImpl::LookupBucketFor(llvm::StringRef) /b/sanitizer-aarch64-linux-bootstrap-ubsan/build/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Support/StringMap.cpp:87:28 ``` Probably causes test failure in `warn-unsafe-buffer-usage-fixits-local-var-span.cpp`: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/60/builds/10619 Probably causes reverse-iteration test failure in `test-output-format.ll`: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/54/builds/3545
The alpha.security.taint.TaintPropagation checker indicated incorrectly the origin of the source if the taintedness propagated through multiple variables. This is fixed now.
d989987 to
3236f7d
Compare
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 16, 2023
…ttempting to dereferencing iterators.
Runnign some tests with asan built of LLD would throw errors similar to the following:
AddressSanitizer:DEADLYSIGNAL
#0 0x55d8e6da5df7 in operator() /mnt/ssd/repo/lld/llvm-project/lld/MachO/Arch/ARM64.cpp:612
#1 0x55d8e6daa514 in operator() /mnt/ssd/repo/lld/llvm-project/lld/MachO/Arch/ARM64.cpp:650
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D157027
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 28, 2024
…lvm#104148) `hasOperands` does not always execute matchers in the order they are written. This can cause issue in code using bindings when one operand matcher is relying on a binding set by the other. With this change, the first matcher present in the code is always executed first and any binding it sets are available to the second matcher. Simple example with current version (1 match) and new version (2 matches): ```bash > cat tmp.cpp int a = 13; int b = ((int) a) - a; int c = a - ((int) a); > clang-query tmp.cpp clang-query> set traversal IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource clang-query> m binaryOperator(hasOperands(cStyleCastExpr(has(declRefExpr(hasDeclaration(valueDecl().bind("d"))))), declRefExpr(hasDeclaration(valueDecl(equalsBoundNode("d")))))) Match #1: tmp.cpp:1:1: note: "d" binds here int a = 13; ^~~~~~~~~~ tmp.cpp:2:9: note: "root" binds here int b = ((int)a) - a; ^~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 match. > ./build/bin/clang-query tmp.cpp clang-query> set traversal IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource clang-query> m binaryOperator(hasOperands(cStyleCastExpr(has(declRefExpr(hasDeclaration(valueDecl().bind("d"))))), declRefExpr(hasDeclaration(valueDecl(equalsBoundNode("d")))))) Match #1: tmp.cpp:1:1: note: "d" binds here 1 | int a = 13; | ^~~~~~~~~~ tmp.cpp:2:9: note: "root" binds here 2 | int b = ((int)a) - a; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ Match #2: tmp.cpp:1:1: note: "d" binds here 1 | int a = 13; | ^~~~~~~~~~ tmp.cpp:3:9: note: "root" binds here 3 | int c = a - ((int)a); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 matches. ``` If this should be documented or regression tested anywhere please let me know where.
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 28, 2024
…104523) Compilers and language runtimes often use helper functions that are fundamentally uninteresting when debugging anything but the compiler/runtime itself. This patch introduces a user-extensible mechanism that allows for these frames to be hidden from backtraces and automatically skipped over when navigating the stack with `up` and `down`. This does not affect the numbering of frames, so `f <N>` will still provide access to the hidden frames. The `bt` output will also print a hint that frames have been hidden. My primary motivation for this feature is to hide thunks in the Swift programming language, but I'm including an example recognizer for `std::function::operator()` that I wished for myself many times while debugging LLDB. rdar://126629381 Example output. (Yes, my proof-of-concept recognizer could hide even more frames if we had a method that returned the function name without the return type or I used something that isn't based off regex, but it's really only meant as an example). before: ``` (lldb) thread backtrace --filtered=false * thread #1, queue = 'com.apple.main-thread', stop reason = breakpoint 1.1 * frame #0: 0x0000000100001f04 a.out`foo(x=1, y=1) at main.cpp:4:10 frame #1: 0x0000000100003a00 a.out`decltype(std::declval<int (*&)(int, int)>()(std::declval<int>(), std::declval<int>())) std::__1::__invoke[abi:se200000]<int (*&)(int, int), int, int>(__f=0x000000016fdff280, __args=0x000000016fdff224, __args=0x000000016fdff220) at invoke.h:149:25 frame #2: 0x000000010000399c a.out`int std::__1::__invoke_void_return_wrapper<int, false>::__call[abi:se200000]<int (*&)(int, int), int, int>(__args=0x000000016fdff280, __args=0x000000016fdff224, __args=0x000000016fdff220) at invoke.h:216:12 frame #3: 0x0000000100003968 a.out`std::__1::__function::__alloc_func<int (*)(int, int), std::__1::allocator<int (*)(int, int)>, int (int, int)>::operator()[abi:se200000](this=0x000000016fdff280, __arg=0x000000016fdff224, __arg=0x000000016fdff220) at function.h:171:12 frame llvm#4: 0x00000001000026bc a.out`std::__1::__function::__func<int (*)(int, int), std::__1::allocator<int (*)(int, int)>, int (int, int)>::operator()(this=0x000000016fdff278, __arg=0x000000016fdff224, __arg=0x000000016fdff220) at function.h:313:10 frame llvm#5: 0x0000000100003c38 a.out`std::__1::__function::__value_func<int (int, int)>::operator()[abi:se200000](this=0x000000016fdff278, __args=0x000000016fdff224, __args=0x000000016fdff220) const at function.h:430:12 frame llvm#6: 0x0000000100002038 a.out`std::__1::function<int (int, int)>::operator()(this= Function = foo(int, int) , __arg=1, __arg=1) const at function.h:989:10 frame llvm#7: 0x0000000100001f64 a.out`main(argc=1, argv=0x000000016fdff4f8) at main.cpp:9:10 frame llvm#8: 0x0000000183cdf154 dyld`start + 2476 (lldb) ``` after ``` (lldb) bt * thread #1, queue = 'com.apple.main-thread', stop reason = breakpoint 1.1 * frame #0: 0x0000000100001f04 a.out`foo(x=1, y=1) at main.cpp:4:10 frame #1: 0x0000000100003a00 a.out`decltype(std::declval<int (*&)(int, int)>()(std::declval<int>(), std::declval<int>())) std::__1::__invoke[abi:se200000]<int (*&)(int, int), int, int>(__f=0x000000016fdff280, __args=0x000000016fdff224, __args=0x000000016fdff220) at invoke.h:149:25 frame #2: 0x000000010000399c a.out`int std::__1::__invoke_void_return_wrapper<int, false>::__call[abi:se200000]<int (*&)(int, int), int, int>(__args=0x000000016fdff280, __args=0x000000016fdff224, __args=0x000000016fdff220) at invoke.h:216:12 frame llvm#6: 0x0000000100002038 a.out`std::__1::function<int (int, int)>::operator()(this= Function = foo(int, int) , __arg=1, __arg=1) const at function.h:989:10 frame llvm#7: 0x0000000100001f64 a.out`main(argc=1, argv=0x000000016fdff4f8) at main.cpp:9:10 frame llvm#8: 0x0000000183cdf154 dyld`start + 2476 Note: Some frames were hidden by frame recognizers ```
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2025
…e exception specification of a function (llvm#90760) [temp.deduct.general] p6 states: > At certain points in the template argument deduction process it is necessary to take a function type that makes use of template parameters and replace those template parameters with the corresponding template arguments. This is done at the beginning of template argument deduction when any explicitly specified template arguments are substituted into the function type, and again at the end of template argument deduction when any template arguments that were deduced or obtained from default arguments are substituted. [temp.deduct.general] p7 goes on to say: > The _deduction substitution loci_ are > - the function type outside of the _noexcept-specifier_, > - the explicit-specifier, > - the template parameter declarations, and > - the template argument list of a partial specialization > > The substitution occurs in all types and expressions that are used in the deduction substitution loci. [...] Consider the following: ```cpp struct A { static constexpr bool x = true; }; template<typename T, typename U> void f(T, U) noexcept(T::x); // #1 template<typename T, typename U> void f(T, U*) noexcept(T::y); // #2 template<> void f<A>(A, int*) noexcept; // clang currently accepts, GCC and EDG reject ``` Currently, `Sema::SubstituteExplicitTemplateArguments` will substitute into the _noexcept-specifier_ when deducing template arguments from a function declaration or when deducing template arguments for taking the address of a function template (and the substitution is treated as a SFINAE context). In the above example, `#1` is selected as the primary template because substitution of the explicit template arguments into the _noexcept-specifier_ of `#2` failed, which resulted in the candidate being ignored. This behavior is incorrect ([temp.deduct.general] note 4 says as much), and this patch corrects it by deferring all substitution into the _noexcept-specifier_ until it is instantiated. As part of the necessary changes to make this patch work, the instantiation of the exception specification of a function template specialization when taking the address of a function template is changed to only occur for the function selected by overload resolution per [except.spec] p13.1 (as opposed to being instantiated for every candidate).
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2025
…ined member functions & member function templates (llvm#88963) Consider the following snippet from the discussion of CWG2847 on the core reflector: ``` template<typename T> concept C = sizeof(T) <= sizeof(long); template<typename T> struct A { template<typename U> void f(U) requires C<U>; // #1, declares a function template void g() requires C<T>; // #2, declares a function template<> void f(char); // #3, an explicit specialization of a function template that declares a function }; template<> template<typename U> void A<short>::f(U) requires C<U>; // llvm#4, an explicit specialization of a function template that declares a function template template<> template<> void A<int>::f(int); // llvm#5, an explicit specialization of a function template that declares a function template<> void A<long>::g(); // llvm#6, an explicit specialization of a function that declares a function ``` A number of problems exist: - Clang rejects `llvm#4` because the trailing _requires-clause_ has `U` substituted with the wrong template parameter depth when `Sema::AreConstraintExpressionsEqual` is called to determine whether it matches the trailing _requires-clause_ of the implicitly instantiated function template. - Clang rejects `llvm#5` because the function template specialization instantiated from `A<int>::f` has a trailing _requires-clause_, but `llvm#5` does not (nor can it have one as it isn't a templated function). - Clang rejects `llvm#6` for the same reasons it rejects `llvm#5`. This patch resolves these issues by making the following changes: - To fix `llvm#4`, `Sema::AreConstraintExpressionsEqual` is passed `FunctionTemplateDecl`s when comparing the trailing _requires-clauses_ of `llvm#4` and the function template instantiated from `#1`. - To fix `llvm#5` and `llvm#6`, the trailing _requires-clauses_ are not compared for explicit specializations that declare functions. In addition to these changes, `CheckMemberSpecialization` now considers constraint satisfaction/constraint partial ordering when determining which member function is specialized by an explicit specialization of a member function for an implicit instantiation of a class template (we previously would select the first function that has the same type as the explicit specialization). With constraints taken under consideration, we match EDG's behavior for these declarations.
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2025
In `Driver.cpp` `std::atomic<uint64_t>` is used which may need
libatomic.
Build failure (if that is of interest):
```
[127/135] Linking CXX shared library lib/liblldMachO.so.20.1
ninja: job failed: : && /usr/lib/ccache/bin/clang++-20 -fPIC -Os -fstack-clash-protection -Wformat -Werror=format-security -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS=1 -D_LIBCPP_ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY_ANNOTATIONS=1 -D_LIBCPP_ENABLE_HARDENED_MODE=1 -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g1 -fPIC -fno-semantic-interposition -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -Werror=date-time -Werror=unguarded-availability-new -Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-field-initializers -Wimplicit-fallthrough -Wcovered-switch-default -Wno-noexcept-type -Wnon-virtual-dtor -Wdelete-non-virtual-dtor -Wsuggest-override -Wstring-conversion -Wmisleading-indentation -Wctad-maybe-unsupported -fdiagnostics-color -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -Wl,--as-needed,-O1,--sort-common -Wl,-z,defs -Wl,-z,nodelete -Wl,-rpath-link,/home/user/aports/main/lld20/src/lld-20.1.5.src/build/./lib -Wl,--gc-sections -shared -Wl,-soname,liblldMachO.so.20.1 -o lib/liblldMachO.so.20.1 MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Arch/ARM64.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Arch/ARM64Common.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Arch/ARM64_32.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Arch/X86_64.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/ConcatOutputSection.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Driver.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/DriverUtils.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Dwarf.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/EhFrame.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/ExportTrie.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/ICF.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/InputFiles.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/InputSection.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/LTO.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/MapFile.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/MarkLive.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/ObjC.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/OutputSection.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/OutputSegment.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Relocations.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/BPSectionOrderer.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/SectionPriorities.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Sections.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/SymbolTable.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Symbols.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/SyntheticSections.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Target.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/UnwindInfoSection.cpp.o MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Writer.cpp.o -L/usr/lib/llvm20/lib -Wl,-rpath,"\$ORIGIN/../lib:/usr/lib/llvm20/lib:/home/user/aports/main/lld20/src/lld-20.1.5.src/build/lib:" lib/liblldCommon.so.20.1 /usr/lib/llvm20/lib/libLLVM.so.20.1 && :
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/14.3.0/../../../../powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/bin/ld: MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Driver.cpp.o: in function `handleExplicitExports()':
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/14.3.0/../../../../include/c++/14.3.0/bits/atomic_base.h:501:(.text._ZL21handleExplicitExportsv+0xb8): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/14.3.0/../../../../powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/bin/ld: /usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/14.3.0/../../../../include/c++/14.3.0/bits/atomic_base.h:501:(.text._ZL21handleExplicitExportsv+0x180): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/14.3.0/../../../../powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/bin/ld: MachO/CMakeFiles/lldMachO.dir/Driver.cpp.o: in function `void llvm::function_ref<void (unsigned int)>::callback_fn<llvm::parallelForEach<lld::macho::Symbol* const*, handleExplicitExports()::$_0>(lld::macho::Symbol* const*, lld::macho::Symbol* const*, handleExplicitExports()::$_0)::{lambda(unsigned int)#1}>(int, unsigned int)':
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-alpine-linux-musl/14.3.0/../../../../include/c++/14.3.0/bits/atomic_base.h:631:(.text._ZN4llvm12function_refIFvjEE11callback_fnIZNS_15parallelForEachIPKPN3lld5macho6SymbolEZL21handleExplicitExportsvE3$_0EEvT_SC_T0_EUljE_EEvij+0xd4): undefined reference to `__atomic_fetch_add_8'
clang++-20: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
```
CC @int3 @gkmhub @smeenai
Similar to
llvm@f0b451c
dkrupp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2025
llvm#164955 has a use-after-scope (https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/169/builds/16454): ``` ==mlir-opt==3940651==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope on address 0x6e1f6ba5c878 at pc 0x6336b214912a bp 0x7ffe607f1670 sp 0x7ffe607f1668 READ of size 4 at 0x6e1f6ba5c878 thread T0 #0 0x6336b2149129 in size /home/b/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fast/build/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:80:32 #1 0x6336b2149129 in operator[] /home/b/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fast/build/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:299:5 #2 0x6336b2149129 in populateBoundsForShapedValueDim /home/b/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fast/build/llvm-project/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/ValueBoundsOpInterfaceImpl.cpp:113:43 ... ``` This patch attempts to fix-forward by stack-allocating reassocIndices, instead of taking a reference to a return value.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This patch improves the diagnostics of the alpha.security.taint.TaintPropagation and taint related checkers by showing the "Taint originated here" note at the correct place, where the attacker may inject it. This greatly improves the understandability of the taint reports.
Taint Analysis: The attacker injects the malicious data at the taint source (e.g. getenv() call) which is then propagated and used at taint sink (e.g. exec() call) causing a security vulnerability (e.g. shell injection vulnerability), without data sanitation.
The goal of the checker is to discover and show to the user these potential taint source, sink pairs and the propagation call chain.
In the baseline the taint source was pointing to an invalid location, typically somewhere between the real taint source and sink.
After the fix, the "Taint originated here" tag is correctly shown at the taint source. This is the function call where the attacker can inject a malicious data (e.g. reading from environment variable, reading from file, reding from standard input etc.).
Before the patch the clang static analyzer puts the taint origin note wrongly to the
strtol(..)call.After the fix, the taint origin point is correctly annotated at
getenv()where the attacker really injects the value.The BugVisitor placing the note was wrongly going back only until introduction of the tainted SVal in the sink.
This patch creates a new uniquely identified taint flow for each taint source (e.g.getenv()) it traverses and places a NoteTag ("Taint originated here") with the new id. Then, when the bug report is generated, the taint flow id is propagated back (in the new TainBugReport) along the bug path and the correct "Taint originated here." annotation is generated (matching the flow id).
You can find the new improved reports
here
And the old reports (look out for "Taint originated here" notes. They are at the wrong place, close to the end of the reports)
here