5. Segments


Well, my terminal's locked up, and I ain't got any Mail,
And I can't recall the last time that my program didn't fail;
I've got stacks in my structs, I've got arrays in my queues,
I've got the : Segmentation violation -- Core dumped blues.

ELF provides two parallel views of a file's contents. The linking view is defined by the section header table, an array of Elf32_Shdr. The execution view is defined by the program header table, an array of Elf32_Phdr.

Theoretically the ELF specification is quite liberal. Position, contents and order of sections and segments are not restricted. But in real life an operating system is to used to just one program loader, one linker and few compilers. This makes the work of virus writers easier. We can reverse engineer the de-facto standard, a tiny subset of what the ELF standard allows. On a typical system only a minority of programs violates this subset, so ignoring them does not lower chances of survival.

All headers necessary to execute a program are stuffed into the first page (0x1000 bytes on sparc), probably to simplify the design of an OS' executable format detector. Dynamically linked executables require a few program headers more than static executables, but that's about all the variation there is. In any case the program header of the code segments is followed by the program header of the data segment. Static executables have the code segment at index 0, dynamically linked executables at index 2.

Let's get a bit more serious and examine the assembly program from The language of evil. A standalone executable built from assembler source is probably the most trivial example we can find.

5.1. objdump -fp

5.2. readelf -l

objdump's output is butt-ugly. On to readelf. The line starting with "There are 5 program headers" shows the value of e_phnum and e_phoff.

5.3. elfdump

And just to complete the confusion a look on the native Solaris tool.

5.4. Observations

Nice to see the entry point (0x10250) again. Program layout is a simplified variation of Sort of an answer. The value of FileSiz includes ELF header and program header.


overhead = Entry point - VirtAddr =

0x10250 - 0x10000 = 0x250 = 592 bytes

Effective code size:

code size = FileSiz - overhead =

0x274 - 0x250 = 0x24 = 36 bytes

This matches with the disassembly listing. However, the ratio of file size to effective code deserves the title "Bloat", with capital B. Only 3 percent of the file actually do something useful!

Bloat factor:

code size / file size = 36 / 1416 = 0.025

5.5. Segments of /usr/bin/csh

Anyway, we see that even for trivial examples the code is surrounded by lots of other stuff. Let's zoom in on our target. [1].

Command: pre/sparc-sunos5.9/segments/sh/readelf.sh
shell=$( /usr/xpg4/bin/sed 1q \
	out/sparc-sunos5.9/scanner/segment_padding/infect )
[ -x "${shell}" ] || exit 1
/usr/xpg4/bin/ls -Ll ${shell}
/opt/sfw/bin/greadelf -l ${shell}

Output: out/sparc-sunos5.9/segments/sh/readelf
-r-xr-xr-x   2 root     bin       159332 Apr  7  2002 /usr/bin/csh

Elf file type is EXEC (Executable file)
Entry point 0x17f0c
There are 6 program headers, starting at offset 52

Program Headers:
  Type           Offset   VirtAddr   PhysAddr   FileSiz MemSiz  Flg Align
  PHDR           0x000034 0x00010034 0x00000000 0x000c0 0x000c0 R E 0
  INTERP         0x000e38 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00011 0x00000 R   0
      [Requesting program interpreter: /usr/lib/ld.so.1]
  LOAD           0x000000 0x00010000 0x00000000 0x234a4 0x234a4 R E 0x10000
  LOAD           0x024000 0x00044000 0x00000000 0x028e0 0x06238 RWE 0x10000
  DYNAMIC        0x0245b4 0x000445b4 0x00000000 0x00100 0x00000 RWE 0
  LOOS+ffffffb   0x000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000 0x00000 RW  0

 Section to Segment mapping:
  Segment Sections...
   02     .SUNW_syminfo .interp .hash .dynsym .dynstr .SUNW_version .rela.ex_shared .rela.cpp_finidata .rela.data .rela.bss .rela.plt .text .init .fini .exception_ranges .rodata .rodata1 
   03     .got .plt .dynamic .ex_shared .cpp_finidata .data .data1 .bss 

Looks intimidating. But then the ELF specification says that only segments of type "LOAD" are considered for execution. Since the flags of the first one include "execute" but not "write" it must be the code segment. The other one has the "write" flags set, so it must be the data segment. There is one possible deviation: On sparc-sunos most executables built by Sun feature a data segment with "execute" flag.

MemSiz (0x6238) is larger than FileSiz (0x28e0) in the data segment. Just like with mmap(2) excessive bytes are defined to be initialized with 0. The linker takes advantages of that by grouping all variables that should be initialized to zero at the end. Note that the last section of segment 3 (counting starts with 0) is called .bss, the traditional name for this kind of area.

The mapping for segment 2 looks even more complex. But I would guess that .rodata means "read-only data" and .text contains productive code, as opposed to the administrative stuff in the other sections.

Some executables of Red Hat 8.0 have an additional program header of type GNU_EH_FRAME.

5.6. Self modifying code

Previous examples in The language of evil used an __attribute__ clause to put the code into section .text. Without that it would end up in section .rodata. Both are members of the code segment which is executable in it its entireness; in this regard that would make no difference. But what about putting the code a write enabled data segment? These settings can probably be changed by mprotect(2). [1] But what are the default settings?

Our minimal example is position independent and can be moved around freely. We need a slight modification to be able to call it like a function, though.

Output = Source: out/sparc-sunos5.9/evil_magic/func.inc
const unsigned char in_code[]
__attribute__ (( aligned(8), section(".text") )) =
  0x82,0x10,0x20,0x04,           /* 0: mov 4, %g1                    */
  0x90,0x10,0x20,0x01,           /* 4: mov 1, %o0                    */
  0x13,0x00,0x00,0x40,           /* 8: sethi %hi(0x10000), %o1       */
  0x92,0x12,0x60,0x01,           /* c: or %o1, 1, %o159              */
  0x94,0x10,0x20,0x03,           /* 10: mov 3, %o2                   */
  0x91,0xd0,0x20,0x08,           /* 14: ta 8                         */
  0x81,0xc3,0xe0,0x08,           /* 18: retl                         */
  0x01,0x00,0x00,0x00            /* 1c: nop                          */
}; /* 32 bytes (0x20) */

The program using this piece is platform independent. You will find it at Self modifying code (i). Below is the output. The

Output: out/sparc-sunos5.9/evil_magic/self_modify
   10730 is code ... ELF sigill=0
   20ba0 is data ... ELF sigill=0
   20d18 is heap ... ELF sigill=0
effffb80 is stack ... ELF sigill=0



The matter is actually quite complex. Theo de Raadt himself describes the problems they had with making OpenBSD more secure at http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-tech&m=104391783312978&w=2