Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Add a new challenge about pointer arithmetic ops
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
In this challenge, we want to look at the safe usage of pointer
arithmetic operations.
  • Loading branch information
celinval committed Jun 24, 2024
1 parent df8da5a commit 9e66c5c
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 111 additions and 3 deletions.
107 changes: 107 additions & 0 deletions doc/src/0003-pointer-arithmentic.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
# Challenge 3: Verifying raw pointer arithmetic

- **Status:** Open
- **Solution:**
- **Tracking Issue:** <https://github.com/model-checking/verify-rust-std/issues/21>
- **Start date:** 24/06/24
- **End date:** 24/12/10

-------------------


## Goal

The goal of this challenge is to verify safety of code that relies on raw pointer arithmetic, and eventual
raw pointer access.

## Motivation

Raw pointer arithmetic is a common operation employed in the implementation of highly optimized code,
as well as containers with dynamic size.
Examples of the former are `str::repeat`, `[u8]::is_asc_ii`,
while for the latter we have `Vec`, `VecDeque`, `HashMap`.

These unsafe operations are usually abstracted from the end user with the usage of
[safe abstractions](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/book/ch19-01-unsafe-rust.html#creating-a-safe-abstraction-over-unsafe-code).
However, bugs in these abstractions may compromise entire applications, potentially becoming a security concern.
See [CVE-2018-1000810](https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2018-1000810/) for an example of an issue with an
optimization of `str::repeat`.

These safe abstractions are great candidates for software verification.
They are critical for Rust applications safety, and they are modular by design.

## Description

Rust provide different options for pointer arithmetic, which have different semantics when it comes to safety.
For example, methods such as [`ptr::offset`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.pointer.html#method.offset),
[`ptr::add`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.pointer.html#method.add),
and [`ptr::sub`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.pointer.html#method.sub)
are unsafe, and one of their safety condition is that:
> - Both the starting and resulting pointer must be either in bounds or one byte past the end of the same allocated object.
I.e., violating this safety condition triggers immediate UB.

On the other hand, wrapping operations such as
[`ptr::wrapping_offset`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.pointer.html#method.wrapping_offset),
[`ptr::wrapping_add`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.pointer.html#method.wrapping_add),
[`ptr::wrapping_sub`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.pointer.html#method.wrapping_sub),
are safe, however, the resulting pointer must not be used to read or write other allocated objects.

Thus, we would like to be able to verify usage of these different methods within the standard library
to ensure they are safely employed,
as well as provide function contract that can be used by other Rust crates to verify their own usage of these methods.

### Assumptions

For this challenge, we do not require a full proof that is independent of the pointee type `T`.
Instead, we require that the verification is done for the following pointee types:
1. All integer type.
2. At least one `dyn Trait`.
3. At least one slice.
4. For unit type.
5. At least one composite types with multiple non-ZST fields.

### Success Criteria

All the following unsafe functions must be annotated with safety contracts and the contracts have been verified:

| Function | Location |
|-----------------------------|----------|
| *const T::add | core::ptr |
| *const T::sub | core::ptr |
| *const T::offset | core::ptr |
| *const T::offset_from | core::ptr |
| *const T::byte_add | core::ptr |
| *const T::byte_sub | core::ptr |
| *const T::byte_offset | core::ptr |
| *const T::byte_offset_from | core::ptr |
| *mut T::add | core::ptr |
| *mut T::sub | core::ptr |
| *mut T::offset | core::ptr |
| *mut T::offset_from | core::ptr |
| *mut T::byte_add | core::ptr |
| *mut T::byte_sub | core::ptr |
| *mut T::byte_offset | core::ptr |
| *mut T::byte_offset_from | core::ptr |

At least 3 of the following usages were proven safe:

| Function | Location |
|-------------------|---------------|
| \[u8\]::is_asc_ii | core::slice |
| String::remove | alloc::string |
| Vec::swap_remove | alloc::vec |
| Option::as_slice | core::option |
| VecDeque::swap | collections::vec_deque |

All proofs must automatically ensure the absence of the following undefined behaviors [ref](https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/blob/142b2ed77d33f37a9973772bd95e6144ed9dce43/src/behavior-considered-undefined.md):

- Accessing (loading from or storing to) a place that is dangling or based on a misaligned pointer.
- Performing a place projection that violates the requirements of in-bounds pointer arithmetic.
A place projection is a field expression, a tuple index expression, or an array/slice index expression.
- Invoking undefined behavior via compiler intrinsics.
- Producing an invalid value, even in private fields and locals.

Note: All solutions to verification challenges need to satisfy the criteria established in the [challenge book](../general-rules.md)
in addition to the ones listed above.

7 changes: 4 additions & 3 deletions doc/src/SUMMARY.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@

---

# Challenges
- [Core Transmutation](./core-transmutation.md)
- [Memory safety of core intrinsics](./intrinsics-memory.md)
- [Challenges](./challenges.md)
- [Core Transmutation](./challenges/0001-core-transmutation.md)
- [Memory safety of core intrinsics](./challenges/0002-intrinsics-memory.md)
- [Pointer Arithmetic](./challenges/0003-pointer-arithmentic.md)

0 comments on commit 9e66c5c

Please sign in to comment.