Posts Tagged 'SEH'

How GUI Thread Conversion on Svr03 Breaks the SEH Chain

The Windows kernel maintains two types of threads — Non-GUI threads, and GUI threads. Non-GUI threads threads use the default stack size of 12KB (on i386, which this this discussion applies to) and the default System Service Descriptor table (SSDT), KeServiceDescriptorTable. GUI threads, in contrast, are expected to have much larger stack requirements and thus use an extended stack size of 60 KB (Note: these are the numbers for Svr03 and may vary among releases). More importantly, however, GUI threads use a different SSDT — KeServiceDescriptorTableShadow. Unlike KeServiceDescriptorTable, which only supports the basic set of system calls, this SSDT also includes all the User and GDI system services.

All threads start off as Non-GUI threads. Once the application makes a call to a system service that does not fall within the default range, however, the NT kernel will suspect this thread to be about to do GUI stuff — and will convert the thread into a GUI thread.

Converting a thread to a GUI thread naturally has to entail two things — swapping the SSDT, and enlarging the stack. While swapping the SSDT is not really interesting, enlarging the stack size poses a challenge — you cannot really enlarge a stack as the nearby pages that would need to be acquired may not be available.

As a consequence, enlarging the stack works by swapping the stack. The old, small stack is exchanged against a newly allocated, larger stack. Now swapping a stack is not really a common thing to do and is pretty easy to get wrong. And well, as it turns out, the Svr03 kernel did in fact get it wrong.

But let’s start at the beginning.

When the number of the requested system service is found to be beyond the range supported by the default SSDT, KiConvertToGuiThread is called to perform the thread conversion. KiConvertToGuiThread itself is pretty dumb and lets PsConvertToGuiThread do the actual work.

The following pseudo code illustrates what PsConvertToGuiThread does:

NTSTATUS PsConvertToGuiThread()
{
  //
  // Create the new stack.
  //
  LargeStack = MmCreateKernelStack( ... )
  
  if ( LargeStack == NULL )
  {
    __try
    {
      //
      // Allocation failed -- set last error value.
      //
      NtCurrentTeb()->LastErrorValue = ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY;
    }
    __except( ... )
    {
    }
    
    //
    // N.B. We are still on the old stack.
    //
    
    //
    // This will copy the old thread's contents to the new stack and 
    // migrate the context of the current thread to the new stack.
    //
    SmallStack = KeSwitchKernelStack( LargeStack, ... );

    //
    // Now we are on the new stack.
    //
    MmDeleteKernelStack( SmallStack, ... );
  }
  ...
  //
  // Notify Win32k.
  //
  
  ( PspW32ProcessCallout )( ... )
  ...
  ( PspW32ThreadCallout ) ( ... )
  
  ...
}

This code looks innocent enough, but infact, it is lying. Too see why, you have to recall how Structured Exception Handling is implemented on i386 and how the C compiler makes use of it (I think I have spent way too much time with SEH over the past months…): The __try/__except-block at the top of the routine will cause to the compiler to emit the typical SEH prolog at the beginning of the function. The purpose of this prolog is to set up an EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD and to put this record onto the current thread’s SEH chain, which in turn is rooted in the PCR. In the same way, the compiler will put an appropriate epilog to the end of the routine.

So while the code above suggests that the SEH stuff is scoped to the very beginning of the function, it will not be until the end of the function has been reached that the EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD is torn down and removed from the SEH chain.

And at this point, it should become clear why this becomes a problem in the context of stack swapping. At the point where KeSwitchKernelStack is called, the EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD will still be listed in the SEH chain, although it does not serve any particular purpose any more. So KeSwitchKernelStack is called, which will, as indicated before, copy the contents of the old stack to the new stack — which, of course, includes the EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD.

But…

neither KeSwitchKernelStack, nor PsConvertToGuiThread updates the SEH pointer in the PCR! After the swapping has been conducted and MmDeleteKernelStack has returned, the root of the SEH chain will point to freed memory — memory where the EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD once has been.

Now two things are worth noting. First, PsConvertToGuiThread can be expected to occupy the bottommost stack frame of the kernel stack. A situation where the dangling pointer could harm a caller of PsConvertToGuiThread is thus not possible.

Secondly, PsConvertToGuiThread makes callouts to Win32k by invoking the callbacks pointed to by PspW32ProcessCallout and PspW32ThreadCallout. And in fact, it is only PsConvertToGuiThread‘s luck that these routines are so well behaved that they do not cause the system to bugcheck because of the dangling pointer. If one of these routines (or routines called by these) did anything with the SEH chain going beyond adding another record to the chain and removing it later, odds were that this routine would dereference a stray pointer… and would bugcheck the system…

It is worth noting that the implementation of PsConvertToGuiThread has changed in Windows Vista, so that the above discussion does not apply to this and later releases.

Advertisements

Fun with low level SEH

Most code that uses Structured Exception Handling does this with the help of the compiler, e.g. by using __try/__except/__finally. Still, it is possible to do everything by hand, i.e. to provide your own exception handlers and set up the exception registration records manually. However, as this entire topic is not documented very well, doing so opens room for all kind of surprises…

Although more than 10 years old, the best article on this topic still seems to be Matt Pirtrek’s A Crash Course on the Depths of Win32™ Structured Exception Handling, which I assume you have read. However, note that this article as well as this post refer to i386 only, albeit both to user and kernel mode.

Exception Registration Record Validation

On the i386, SEH uses a linked list of exception registration records. The first record is pointed to by the first member of the TIB. In user mode, the TIB is part of the TEB, in kernel mode it is part of the KPCR — in any case, it is at fs:[0]. Each record, besides containing a pointer to the next lower record, stores a pointer to an exception handler routine.

Installing an exception registration record is thus straightforward and merely requires adjusting the TIB pointer and having the new record point to next lower record. So I set up my custom exception registration record, registered it properly, verified that all pointers are correct and tried using it. However, I was unpleasently surprised that exeption handling totally failed as soon as my exception registration got involved. !exchain reported an “Invalid exception stack”, although checking the pointers manually again seemed to show that the chain of exception registration records was fine and my record seemed ok.

Digging a little deeper I found the reason for that — and in fact I cannot remember ever having heard or read about this requirement before: Windows requires all EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORDs to be located on the stack. Both RtlDispatchException and RtlUnwind check the location of each EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD against the stack limits and abort exception handling as soon as a record is found to be not stack-located. Aborting exception handling in this case means that RaiseException/ExRaiseStatus will just return and execution will be resumed at the caller site as if nothing happened.

This requirement is fair enough, actually, but in my case it totally wrecked my design. I did not have the 8 spare bytes to store this record and thus therefore put the record on some dedicated place on the heap. Urgh. Anyway…

As an interesting side note, Windows Server 2003 performs this stack check against both limits — minimum and maximum address of the stack. Vista, however, only checks against the maximum address (i.e. bottom of the stack) and does not care whether the minimum address (i.e. top of stack) has been exceeded.

Moreover, there is another restriction on exception records that only applies to user mode: The handler routine pointed to by the exception record is verified to not point into the stack. This is obviously another security measure to avoid SEH records to point into some overflown buffers.

SafeSEH

It is worth pointing out that all these checks are unrelated to SafeSEH and are performed regardless of whether your module is SafeSEH compatible or not. Not before these checks have all passed, the exception handler has to undergo the SafeSEH validation: The image base is calculated, the table listing the trusted SEH handlers is looked up and it is checked whether the handler routine pointed to by the current exception record is located in this table.

SafeSEH Handler Registration

Using SafeSEH is a good thing and I link all my modules with /SafeSEH. So when you use low level SEH, i.e. without using the __try/__except compiler support, the obvious question is how to get your SEH handler to be recognized as a trusted handler and be included in the SafeSEH table. After all, the compiler will not be able to recognize that the routine you have just written will in fact be used as an exception handler. The C compiler does not seem to offer support for that — luckily however, ml does by providing the .SAFESEH directive.

If you like writing your exception handler in assmbler, this is all you need. If, however, you prefer C, this is somewhat unsatisfying. The documentation of .SAFESEH states that it can be used with an extrn proc, but that does not seem to work. My solution was thus to write the actual routine in C and write a little thunk in assembler, which I was then able to register using the .SAFESEH directive:

.586               
.model flat, stdcall
option casemap :none

extrn RealExceptionHandlerWrittenInC@16

...

ExceptionHandlerThunk proto
.SAFESEH ExceptionHandlerThunk

...

.code

ExceptionHandlerThunk proc
	jmp RealExceptionHandlerWrittenInC@16
ExceptionHandlerThunk endp

Stupid things you should not do

Finally, there is another little quirk that bit me: Do not use EXCEPTION_CONTINUE_SEARCH where ExceptionContinueSearch would have been appropriate. The EXCEPTION_* constants are for use by exception filters as used for __except statements, whereas the Exception* values have to be used for low level exception handlers. Should be obvious, right? :)

Having chosen the wrong group of constants, I returned EXCEPTION_CONTINUE_SEARCH from my exception handler to indicate that the handler is unable to handle certain exceptions. However, as it turns out, EXCEPTION_CONTINUE_SEARCH has the value 0 and is thus interpreted as ExceptionContinueExecution. Now, returning ExceptionContinueExecution when being requested to handle an exception raised by ExRaiseStatus is obviously a bad idea and in this case led to a STATUS_NONCONTINUABLE_EXCEPTION. After a few of those had stacked up (in kernel mode), VirtualPC crashed with an unrecoverable CPU error. Nice :)


Categories




About me

Johannes Passing, M.Sc., living in Berlin, Germany.

Besides his consulting work, Johannes mainly focusses on Win32, COM, and NT kernel mode development, along with Java and .Net. He also is the author of cfix, a C/C++ unit testing framework for Win32 and NT kernel mode, Visual Assert, a Visual Studio Unit Testing-AddIn, and NTrace, a dynamic function boundary tracing toolkit for Windows NT/x86 kernel/user mode code.

Contact Johannes: jpassing (at) acm org

Johannes' GPG fingerprint is BBB1 1769 B82D CD07 D90A 57E8 9FE1 D441 F7A0 1BB1.

LinkedIn Profile
Xing Profile
Github Profile
Advertisements