# xgadget [![crates.io](https://img.shields.io/crates/v/xgadget.svg)](https://crates.io/crates/xgadget) [![docs.rs](https://docs.rs/xgadget/badge.svg)](https://docs.rs/xgadget/) [![GitHub Actions](https://github.com/entropic-security/xgadget/workflows/test/badge.svg)](https://github.com/entropic-security/xgadget/actions) [![License: MIT](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-MIT-brightgreen.svg)](https://github.com/entropic-security/xgadget/blob/main/LICENSE) Fast, parallel, cross-{patch,compiler}-variant ROP/JOP gadget search for x86 (32-bit) and x64 (64-bit) binaries. Uses the [iced-x86 disassembler library](https://github.com/icedland/iced). This crate can be used as a **CLI binary** (Windows/Linux/MacOS) or a **library** (7 well-known dependencies, all Rust). ### Quickstart Install the CLI tool and show its help menu: ```bash cargo install xgadget --features cli-bin # Build on host (pre-req: https://www.rust-lang.org/tools/install) xgadget --help # List available command line options ``` ### How do ROP and JOP code reuse attacks work? * **Return Oriented Programming (ROP)** introduced *code-reuse* attacks, after hardware mitigations (aka NX, DEP) made *code-injection* less probable (no simultaneous `WRITE` and `EXECUTE` memory permissions). An attacker with stack control chains together short, existing sequences of assembly (aka "gadgets") - should a leak enable computing gadget addresses in the face of ASLR. When contiguous ROP gadget addresses are written to a corrupted stack, each gadget's ending `ret` instruction pops the next gadget's address into the CPU's instruction pointer. The result? Turing-complete control over a victim process.

rop model

ROP Attack Model (recreated from: Bletsch et. al.)

* **Jump Oriented Programming (JOP)** is a newer code reuse method which, unlike ROP, doesn't rely on stack control. The attack *bypasses* hardware-assisted shadow-stack implementations (e.g. Intel CET's shadow stack), and is *limited* but *not prevented* by prototype-insensitive indirect target checks (e.g. Intel CET's IBT). JOP allows storing a table of gadget addresses in any `READ`/`WRITE` memory location. Instead of piggy-backing on call-return semantics to execute a gadget list, a "dispatch" gadget (e.g. `add rax, 8; jmp [rax]`) controls table indexing. Chaining happens if each gadget ends with a `jmp` back to the dispatcher (instead of a `ret`).

jop model

JOP Attack Model (recreated from: Bletsch et. al.)

### About `xgadget` is a tool for **Return-Oriented Programming (ROP)** and **Jump-Oriented Programming (JOP)** exploit development. It's a fast, multi-threaded alternative to awesome tools like [`ROPGadget`](https://github.com/JonathanSalwan/ROPgadget), [`Ropper`](https://github.com/sashs/Ropper), and [`rp`](https://github.com/0vercl0k/rp). The goal is supporting practical usage while simultaneously exploring unique and experimental features. To the best of our knowledge, `xgadget` is the first gadget search tool to be: * **Fast-register-sensitive**: Filters gadgets by register usage behavior, not just matches for a given regex, without SMT solving (more powerful, but often impractical). * `--reg-overwrite [...]` - control any reg (no args) or specific regs (args) * `--reg-mem-write [...]` - write mem indexed via any reg (no args) or specific regs (args) * `--reg-no-write [...]` - don't write any reg (no args) or specific regs (args) * `--reg-read [...]` - read any regs (no args) or specific regs (args) * `--reg-mem-read [...]` - read mem indexed via any reg (no args) or specific regs (args) * `--reg-no-read [...]` - don't read any regs (no args) or specific regs (args) * **JOP-efficient**: JOP search uses instruction semantics - not hardcoded regex for individual encodings. * Optionally filter to JOP "dispatcher" gadgets with flag `--dispatcher` * **Cross-variant:** Finds gadgets that work across multiple variants of a binary (e.g. anti-diversification for different program or compiler versions). Two strategies: 1. ***Full-match*** - Same instruction sequence, same program counter: gadget fully re-usable. Example: * Gadget: `pop rdi; ret;` * Address (in all binaries): `0xc748d`

full match

Cross-variant Full Match

2. ***Partial-match*** - Same instruction sequence, different program counter: gadget logic portable. Example: * Gadget: `pop rdi; ret;` * Address in `bin_v1.1`: `0xc748d` * Address in `bin_v1.2`: `0xc9106`

partial match

Cross-variant Partial Match

* This is entirely optional, you're free to run this tool on a single binary. Other features include: * Supports ELF32, ELF64, PE32, PE32+, Mach-O, and raw files * Parallel across available cores, whether searching a single binary or multiple variants * Currently 8086/x86/x64 only (uses a speed-optimized, arch-specific disassembler) ### CLI Examples Run `xgadget --help` to enumerate available options. * **Example:** Search `/usr/bin/sudo` for reliable ways to control `rdi`: ```bash xgadget /usr/bin/sudo --reg-only --reg-overwrite rdi ``` * **Example:** Search for ROP gadgets that control the value of `rdi`, never read `rsi` or `rdx`, and occur at addresses that don't contain bytes `0x32` or `0x0d`: ```bash xgadget /usr/bin/sudo --rop --reg-overwrite rdi --reg-no-read rsi rdx --bad-bytes 0x32 0x0d ``` * **Example:** Search `/usr/bin/sudo` for "pop, pop, {jmp,call}" gadgets up to 10 instructions long, print results using AT&T syntax: ```bash xgadget /usr/bin/sudo --jop --reg-pop --att --max-len 10 ``` * **Example:** Same as above, except using a regex filter to match "pop, pop, {jmp,call}" instruction strings (slower/less-accurate here, but regex enables flexible search in general): ```bash xgadget /usr/bin/sudo --regex-filter "^(?:pop)(?:.*(?:pop))*.*(?:call|jmp)" --att --max-len 10 ``` * **Example:** Examine the exploit mitigations binaries `sudo` and `lighttpd` have been compiled with: ```bash xgadget /usr/bin/sudo /usr/sbin/lighttpd --check-sec ``` * **Example:** List imported and internal symbols for `lighttpd`: ```bash xgadget /usr/sbin/lighttpd --symbols ``` ### API Usage Find gadgets: ```rust,no_run use xgadget::{Binary, SearchConfig}; let max_gadget_len = 5; // Search single binary let bin = &[Binary::from_path("/path/to/bin_v1").unwrap()]; let gadgets = xgadget::find_gadgets(bin, max_gadget_len, SearchConfig::default()).unwrap(); let stack_pivot_gadgets = xgadget::filter_stack_pivot(gadgets); // Search for cross-variant gadgets, including partial matches let search_config = SearchConfig::default() | SearchConfig::PART; let bins = &[ Binary::from_path("/path/to/bin_v1").unwrap(), Binary::from_path("/path/to/bin_v2").unwrap(), ]; let cross_gadgets = xgadget::find_gadgets(bins, max_gadget_len, search_config).unwrap(); let cross_reg_pop_gadgets = xgadget::filter_reg_pop_only(cross_gadgets); ``` Custom filters can be created using the [`GadgetAnalysis`](crate::GadgetAnalysis) object and/or functions from the [`semantics`](crate::semantics) module. How the above [`filter_stack_pivot`](crate::filters::filter_stack_pivot) function is implemented: ```rust use rayon::prelude::*; use iced_x86; use xgadget::{Gadget, GadgetAnalysis}; /// Parallel filter to gadgets that write the stack pointer pub fn filter_stack_pivot<'a, P>(gadgets: P) -> P where P: IntoParallelIterator> + FromParallelIterator>, { gadgets .into_par_iter() .filter(|g| { let regs_overwritten = g.analysis().regs_overwritten(true); if regs_overwritten.contains(&iced_x86::Register::RSP) || regs_overwritten.contains(&iced_x86::Register::ESP) || regs_overwritten.contains(&iced_x86::Register::SP) { return true; } false }) .collect() } ``` ### Why No Chain Generation? Tools that attempt to automate ROP/JOP chain generation require heavyweight analysis - typically symbolic execution of an intermediate representation. This works well for small binaries and CTF problems, but tends to be error-prone and difficult to scale for large, real-world programs. At present, `xgadget` has a different goal: enable an expert user to manually craft stable exploits by providing fast, accurate gadget discovery. ### ~~Yeah, but can it do 10 OS kernels under 10 seconds?!~~ Repeatable Benchmark Harness To build a Docker container and connect to it: ```bash user@host$ git clone git@github.com:entropic-security/xgadget.git user@host$ cd xgadget user@host$ docker build -t xgadget_bench_container . user@host$ docker run -it xgadget_bench_container root@container:/xgadget# ``` The final build step runs `./benches/bench_setup_ubuntu.sh`. This script downloads and builds 10 consecutive Linux kernels (versions `5.0.1` to `5.0.10` - with `x86_64_defconfig`). Grab a coffee, it can take a while. Once it's done, run `cargo bench` to search all 10 kernels for common gadgets (among other benchmarks): ```bash root@container:/xgadget# cargo bench ``` On an i7-9700K (8C/8T, 3.6GHz base, 4.9 GHz max) machine with `gcc` version 8.4.0: the average runtime, to process *all ten 54MB kernels simultaneously* with a max gadget length of 5 instructions and full-match search for all gadget types (ROP, JOP, and syscall gadgets), is *only 6.3 seconds*! Including partial matches as well takes *just 7.9 seconds*. ### Fast Exploit Similarity Score (FESS) The `--fess` flag uses cross-variant gadget matching as a metric of binary similarity. It's an experiment in anti-diversification for exploitation. To view similarity scores for kernel versions `5.0.1`, `5.0.5`, and `5.0.10` within the container: ```bash root@container# cd ./benches/kernels/ root@container# xgadget vmlinux-5.0.1 vmlinux-5.0.5 vmlinux-5.0.10 --fess TARGET 0 - [ name: 'vmlinux-5.0.1' | fmt-arch: ELF-X64 | entry: 0x00000001000000 | exec bytes/segments: 21,065,728/2 ] TARGET 1 - [ name: 'vmlinux-5.0.5' | fmt-arch: ELF-X64 | entry: 0x00000001000000 | exec bytes/segments: 21,069,824/2 ] TARGET 2 - [ name: 'vmlinux-5.0.10' | fmt-arch: ELF-X64 | entry: 0x00000001000000 | exec bytes/segments: 21,069,824/2 ] ┌─────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬───────────────────────┐ │ Gadget Type │ vmlinux-5.0.1 (base) │ vmlinux-5.0.5 (diff) │ vmlinux-5.0.10 (diff) │ ├─────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤ │ ROP (full) │ 108,380 │ 7,351 (6.78%) │ 556 (0.51%) │ ├─────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤ │ ROP (part) │ - │ 80,783 (74.54%) │ 78,053 (72.02%) │ ├─────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤ │ JOP (full) │ 79,685 │ 1,007 (1.26%) │ 276 (0.35%) │ ├─────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤ │ JOP (part) │ - │ 16,458 (20.65%) │ 12,461 (15.64%) │ ├─────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤ │ SYS (full) │ 8,276 │ 422 (5.10%) │ 119 (1.44%) │ ├─────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤ │ SYS (part) │ - │ 4,317 (52.16%) │ 3,864 (46.69%) │ └─────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴───────────────────────┘ ``` Note these totals exclude low-quality gadgets (use `--all` flag to include). In the output table, we see that up to 72.02% of individual ROP gadgets, and 15.64% of JOP gadgets, are portable across all three versions (counting partial matches). ### Acknowledgements This project started as an optimized solution to Chapter 8, exercise 3 of ["Practical Binary Analysis" by Dennis Andreisse](https://amzn.to/3wvtCwa) (affiliate link), and builds on the design outlined therein. ### Related Resource **Free book about software assurance: [https://highassurance.rs/](https://highassurance.rs/)** ### License and Contributing Licensed under the [MIT license](https://github.com/entropic-security/xgadget/blob/main/LICENSE). [Contributions](https://github.com/entropic-security/xgadget/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) are welcome!