qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 06/10] block/dmg: process XML plists


From: John Snow
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 06/10] block/dmg: process XML plists
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:46:30 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0



On 01/03/2015 06:54 AM, Peter Wu wrote:
On Friday 02 January 2015 19:04:32 John Snow wrote:
On 12/27/2014 10:01 AM, Peter Wu wrote:
The format is simple enough to avoid using a full-blown XML parser.
The offsets are based on the description at
http://newosxbook.com/DMG.html

Signed-off-by: Peter Wu <address@hidden>
---
   block/dmg.c | 69 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
   1 file changed, 69 insertions(+)

diff --git a/block/dmg.c b/block/dmg.c
index 19e4fe2..c03ea01 100644
--- a/block/dmg.c
+++ b/block/dmg.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
   #include "qemu/bswap.h"
   #include "qemu/module.h"
   #include <zlib.h>
+#include <glib.h>

   enum {
       /* Limit chunk sizes to prevent unreasonable amounts of memory being used
@@ -333,12 +334,66 @@ fail:
       return ret;
   }

+static int dmg_read_plist_xml(BlockDriverState *bs, DmgHeaderState *ds,
+                              uint64_t info_begin, uint64_t info_length)
+{
+    BDRVDMGState *s = bs->opaque;
+    int ret;
+    uint8_t *buffer = NULL;
+    char *data_begin, *data_end;
+
+    /* Have at least some length to avoid NULL for g_malloc. Attempt to set a
+     * safe upper cap on the data length. A test sample had a XML length of
+     * about 1 MiB. */
+    if (info_length == 0 || info_length > 16 * 1024 * 1024) {
+        ret = -EINVAL;
+        goto fail;
+    }
+
+    buffer = g_malloc(info_length + 1);
+    buffer[info_length] = '\0';
+    ret = bdrv_pread(bs->file, info_begin, buffer, info_length);
+    if (ret != info_length) {
+        ret = -EINVAL;
+        goto fail;
+    }
+
+    /* look for <data>...</data>. The data is 284 (0x11c) bytes after base64
+     * decode. The actual data element has 431 (0x1af) bytes which includes 
tabs
+     * and line feeds. */
+    data_end = (char *)buffer;
+    while ((data_begin = strstr(data_end, "<data>")) != NULL) {
+        gsize out_len = 0;
+
+        data_begin += 6;
+        data_end = strstr(data_begin, "</data>");
+        /* malformed XML? */
+        if (data_end == NULL) {
+            ret = -EINVAL;
+            goto fail;
+        }
+        *data_end++ = '\0';
+        g_base64_decode_inplace(data_begin, &out_len);
+        ret = dmg_read_mish_block(s, ds, (uint8_t *)data_begin,
+                                  (uint32_t)out_len);
+        if (ret < 0) {
+            goto fail;
+        }
+    }
+    ret = 0;
+
+fail:
+    g_free(buffer);
+    return ret;
+}
+

This starts to make me a little nervous, because we're ignoring so much
of the XML document structure here and just effectively performing a
regular search for "<data>(.*)</data>".

Can we guarantee that the ONLY time the data element is used in this
document is when it is being used in the exact context we are expecting
here, where it contains the b64 mish data we expect it to?

i.e. it is always in a path like this as detailed by
http://newosxbook.com/DMG.html :

plist/dict/key[text()='resource-fork']/following-sibling::dict/key[text()='blkx']/following-sibling::array/dict/key[text()='data']/following-sibling::data

I notice that this document says other sections MAY be present, do any
of them ever need to be parsed? Has anyone written about them before?

Do we know if any use data sections?

I suppose at the very least, sections of interest are always going to
include the "mish" magic, so that should probably keep us from doing
anything too stupid ...

I did not find DMG files with <data> elements at other locations. If it
would occur, at worst we would fail to parse a DMG file. I think that
introducing a XML parser here would introduce a risk for a minor benefit
(being prepared for future cases).

Since this is a property list, in theory people could include all kinds
of data for different keys (which would then be matched by the current
implementation). But how likely is this for a disk image?

FWIW, I looked into the dmg2img program and that also looks for the
strings "<data>" and "</data>". Nobody has raised a bug for that program
so far.

Do you think that it is worth to use a XML parser on potentially
insecure data? I suggest to keep it as it, and reconsider a different
approach in case a problem is encountered.

Kind regards,
Peter

No: I was just asking the questions. If dmg2img gets away with it, the worst that will happen is we will fail to parse/load a DMG file because we ignore everything without the "mish" magic, so this is OK.

I just wanted to check, since I didn't have a lot of DMG files on-hand and I couldn't really find a fuller reference to the types of XML that shows up.

Thanks!

   static int dmg_open(BlockDriverState *bs, QDict *options, int flags,
                       Error **errp)
   {
       BDRVDMGState *s = bs->opaque;
       DmgHeaderState ds;
       uint64_t rsrc_fork_offset, rsrc_fork_length;
+    uint64_t plist_xml_offset, plist_xml_length;
       int64_t offset;
       int ret;

@@ -366,12 +421,26 @@ static int dmg_open(BlockDriverState *bs, QDict *options, 
int flags,
       if (ret < 0) {
           goto fail;
       }
+    /* offset of property list (XMLOffset) */
+    ret = read_uint64(bs, offset + 0xd8, &plist_xml_offset);
+    if (ret < 0) {
+        goto fail;
+    }
+    ret = read_uint64(bs, offset + 0xe0, &plist_xml_length);
+    if (ret < 0) {
+        goto fail;
+    }
       if (rsrc_fork_offset != 0 && rsrc_fork_length != 0) {
           ret = dmg_read_resource_fork(bs, &ds,
                                        rsrc_fork_offset, rsrc_fork_length);
           if (ret < 0) {
               goto fail;
           }
+    } else if (plist_xml_offset != 0 && plist_xml_length != 0) {
+        ret = dmg_read_plist_xml(bs, &ds, plist_xml_offset, plist_xml_length);
+        if (ret < 0) {
+            goto fail;
+        }
       } else {
           ret = -EINVAL;
           goto fail;





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]