Read the original article here.

---

Okay, let's transform the concept of Stack Smashing into a detailed educational resource for "The Forbidden Code" series.

---

Stack Smashing: Exploiting the Call Stack

Welcome to "The Forbidden Code," where we explore the techniques and vulnerabilities often left out of standard programming curricula. Today, we dive into a classic and fundamental vulnerability: Stack Smashing, also known as a Stack Buffer Overflow attack. Understanding stack smashing is critical – not just for those interested in penetration testing or exploit development, but for any serious programmer who wants to write secure code and understand how systems can be compromised at a low level.

While schools might touch upon buffer overflows as a programming error, they rarely delve into the mechanics of how these errors can be leveraged for malicious purposes, or the sophisticated defenses built to thwart them. This is where we step in.

1. The Foundation: The Call Stack

Before we can smash the stack, we need to understand what the stack is and how it works.

Call Stack: A region of memory used by a program to manage function calls. It operates like a Last-In, First-Out (LIFO) data structure. When a function is called, a new "stack frame" is pushed onto the stack. When the function returns, its stack frame is popped off.

The call stack is essential for the orderly execution of functions in a program. It keeps track of where execution should return after a function finishes and stores local variables, function arguments, and other crucial information needed during a function's execution.

Stack Frame (or Activation Record): The portion of the call stack dedicated to a single function call. It typically contains:

• Function arguments passed to the function.
• Local variables declared within the function.
• Saved register values (preserving state of the calling function).
• The Base Pointer (or Frame Pointer): A pointer to the beginning of the current stack frame, used for referencing local variables and arguments.
• The Return Address: The memory address of the instruction in the calling function that should be executed immediately after the current function returns.

The arrangement of these elements within a stack frame can vary slightly depending on the architecture, compiler, and calling convention, but the presence and crucial role of the return address are universal. Crucially for our topic, the stack typically grows downwards in memory on many common architectures (like x86/x64). This means that variables allocated later, or buffers declared after others, might be located at lower memory addresses, potentially adjacent to sensitive control flow data like the return address.

2. The Vulnerability: Buffer Overflow

Stack smashing is a specific form of a broader vulnerability known as a buffer overflow.

Buffer: A contiguous block of memory allocated to hold a sequence of elements, such as characters (a string) or bytes. Buffers have a defined size.

Buffer Overflow: Occurs when data is written to a buffer, but the amount of data exceeds the allocated capacity of the buffer. This results in writing data into adjacent memory locations, potentially corrupting data that was not intended to be modified.

A buffer overflow itself might just cause a program to crash due to data corruption or accessing invalid memory. However, a stack buffer overflow becomes particularly dangerous because the buffer resides on the call stack, potentially adjacent to control flow data like the return address.

Example of a Vulnerable Code Snippet (C):

#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>

void vulnerable_function(char *input_string) {
    char buffer[64]; // A buffer allocated on the stack

    // This function copies data without checking the buffer size!
    strcpy(buffer, input_string);

    printf("Input received: %s\n", buffer);
}

int main() {
    char user_input[256];
    printf("Enter some text: ");
    gets(user_input); // Another dangerous function!

    vulnerable_function(user_input);

    printf("Function returned.\n");
    return 0;
}

In vulnerable_function, buffer is 64 bytes. If input_string contains more than 63 characters (plus the null terminator), strcpy will write past the end of buffer on the stack, corrupting whatever data is located immediately after buffer in memory.

3. The Attack: Stack Smashing in Detail

Stack smashing specifically leverages a stack buffer overflow to overwrite the return address stored on the stack frame. The attacker's goal is to replace the legitimate return address with the memory address of code they want to execute.

The Attack Mechanism:

1. Identify a Vulnerable Function: Find a function that copies data into a fixed-size buffer on the stack without proper bounds checking (e.g., using strcpy, gets, sprintf, memcpy with a controlled size).

2. Determine Stack Layout: Understand how the stack frame for the vulnerable function is structured on the target system (which variables/buffers are where relative to the return address). This often involves analyzing the compiled program or experimenting.

3. Craft Malicious Input: Create an input string that is larger than the buffer. The excess data is carefully constructed:

   • It starts with enough "padding" data to fill the buffer completely and reach the memory location just before the return address.
   • It then contains the attacker's desired Shellcode.
   • Finally, it includes the target memory address where the shellcode is located. This address will overwrite the original return address.

   Conceptual Input Structure: [ Padding (to overflow buffer) ] [ Address of Shellcode ]

   Shellcode: A small piece of code, often written in assembly, designed to perform a specific task when executed. In the context of exploits, shellcode commonly launches a command shell (hence the name) or performs other malicious actions like downloading malware, adding a user, etc.

4. Execute the Vulnerable Function: Provide the crafted malicious input to the vulnerable function. The buffer overflow occurs.

5. Overwrite the Return Address: The part of the malicious input containing the address of the shellcode overwrites the legitimate return address on the stack.

6. Return Hijacking: When the vulnerable function attempts to return, it pops the overwritten return address from the stack and tries to jump to that location.

7. Execute Shellcode: Instead of returning to the caller, the program's execution flow is redirected to the attacker's shellcode, which is now also present on the stack (as part of the overflowed input). The shellcode then executes.

Diagrammatic Concept (Simplified):

Before Overflow:
[ ... ]
[ Saved Base Pointer ]
[ Return Address     ] <--- Execution will jump here on return
[ Local Variables/Buffer ] <--- Vulnerable buffer here
[ Function Arguments ]
[ ... ]

After Overflow (Malicious Input = [ Padding ] [ Address of Shellcode ]):
[ ... ]
[ Saved Base Pointer ]
[ Address of Shellcode ] <--- Return Address overwritten!
[ Padding (overwrote buffer) ]
[ Padding (filled buffer)  ] <--- Buffer overflowed
[ Function Arguments ]
[ ... ]

On Function Return:
Execution jumps to [ Address of Shellcode ] instead of original Return Address.

4. Consequences of a Successful Stack Smashing Attack

The primary consequences of a successful stack smashing attack are severe:

• Arbitrary Code Execution: This is the most dangerous outcome. The attacker can execute any code they choose on the target system, potentially taking full control.
• Denial of Service (DoS): If the overflow doesn't successfully redirect execution to valid shellcode, it will likely overwrite critical stack data (like the base pointer or other variables), leading to a crash. While less severe than code execution, this still disrupts the program's availability.

5. Defending Against Stack Smashing

Because stack smashing is such a classic and dangerous vulnerability, significant effort has gone into developing countermeasures. Understanding these defenses is crucial for writing secure code and for understanding why simple stack overflows are harder to exploit on modern systems (though not impossible!).

Here are some key defenses:

• Secure Coding Practices: The most fundamental defense is preventing the overflow in the first place.

  • Input Validation: Always check the size of user-supplied input before copying it into fixed-size buffers.
  • Using Safer Functions: Avoid dangerous C library functions like strcpy, gets, sprintf, strcat. Use their safer, size-limited counterparts like strncpy, fgets, snprintf, strncat. Even better, use higher-level language features like C++ std::string or equivalent data structures that handle memory management automatically.
  • Language Choice: Languages like Python, Java, C#, etc., that have automatic memory management and bounds checking at runtime are generally not vulnerable to classical buffer overflows like those in C/C++.

• Stack Canaries (Stack Cookies):

  Stack Canary: A small, secret value placed on the stack between the buffer(s) and control data (like the return address) before a function's execution. Just before the function returns, the program checks if the canary's value has been altered. If it has, it indicates a buffer overflow has likely occurred, and the program is typically aborted or terminated gracefully.

  Think of the canary as a tripwire. If an attacker overflows a buffer and wants to reach the return address, they must overwrite the canary value. When the function checks the canary before returning, it detects the modification and halts the program, preventing the hijacked return. Compilers like GCC and Clang can automatically insert stack canaries (e.g., using the -fstack-protector flag).

• Non-Executable Stack (NX bit / DEP):

  Non-Executable (NX) Bit / Data Execution Prevention (DEP): A hardware or software mechanism that marks certain memory regions (like the stack) as non-executable. This prevents code from running in those regions.

  Since stack smashing relies on placing shellcode on the stack and then redirecting execution to it, marking the stack memory as non-executable directly thwarts this final step. Even if an attacker successfully overwrites the return address to point to their shellcode on the stack, the processor will raise an error when it tries to execute instructions from that non-executable memory page. This defense largely neutralizes the direct "shellcode on the stack" attack vector.

• Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR):

  Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR): A security technique that randomly arranges the positions of key data areas (like the base of the executable, libraries, heap, and stack) in a process's memory address space.

  ASLR makes it significantly harder for an attacker to predict the exact memory address of things they want to jump to, such as shellcode they've placed on the stack or useful code gadgets in libraries (relevant for techniques like Return-Oriented Programming, which is often used to bypass NX). If the attacker doesn't know the address of their shellcode on the randomized stack, they can't correctly overwrite the return address to point to it. ASLR works best when coupled with Position-Independent Executables (PIE), which randomizes the base address of the main executable itself.

6. Bypassing Defenses (Briefly)

The cat-and-mouse game of security means attackers constantly seek ways around defenses:

• Canary Bypasses: Attackers might try to leak the canary value if another vulnerability exists, or guess weak canaries (less common now with strong random generation). Format string bugs were historically used for this.
• NX Bypasses: Techniques like Return-Oriented Programming (ROP) are used. Instead of executing code on the stack, the attacker chains together small snippets of existing, legitimate instructions within the program or libraries (called "gadgets") which are already in executable memory. The stack is then used to store a sequence of addresses pointing to these gadgets and data for them, effectively building a malicious logic by "returning" from one gadget to the next.
• ASLR Bypasses: Information leakage vulnerabilities (like format string bugs, uninitialized memory reads, etc.) can be used to leak the address of something (e.g., a stack address, a library address), allowing the attacker to calculate the position of other elements (like shellcode or gadgets) relative to that known address. Partial or brute-force overwrites can also sometimes bypass ASLR on 32-bit systems where the address space is smaller.

7. Conclusion: Why This Matters

Understanding stack smashing goes beyond mere academic curiosity. It's a foundational concept in software security and low-level programming.

• For the offensive security practitioner, it's a stepping stone to more advanced exploit techniques and understanding how vulnerabilities translate into control.
• For the defensive programmer, recognizing vulnerable patterns and implementing the appropriate countermeasures (secure coding, compiler flags, understanding system-level protections) is essential to building robust applications that can withstand such attacks.

While modern operating systems and compilers have made classical stack smashing significantly harder with defenses like Canaries, NX, and ASLR, the fundamental principles remain relevant. New vulnerabilities are discovered, and understanding these core mechanisms is key to staying ahead in the ever-evolving landscape of cybersecurity. This dive into stack smashing is a crucial step in truly understanding "The Forbidden Code."