NoJITsu: Locking Down JavaScript Engines
Taemin Park, Karel Dhondt, David Gens, Yeoul Na, Stijn Volckaert, Michael Franz
Abstract
Data-only attacks against dynamic scripting environments have become common. Web browsers and other modern applications embed scripting engines to support interactive content. The scripting engines optimize performance via just-in-time compilation. Since applications are increasingly hardened against code-reuse attacks, adversaries are looking to achieve code execution or elevate privileges by corrupting sensitive data like the intermediate representation of optimizing JIT compilers. This has inspired numerous defenses for just-in-time compilers.
Our paper demonstrates that securing JIT compilation is not sufficient. First, we present a proof-of-concept data-only attack against a recent version of Mozilla’s SpiderMonkey JIT in which the attacker only corrupts heap objects to successfully issue a system call from within bytecode execution at run time. Previous work assumed that bytecode execution is safe by construction since interpreters only allow a narrow set of benign instructions and bytecode is always checked for validity before execution. We show that this does not prevent malicious code execution in practice. Second, we design a novel defense, dubbed NoJITsu to protect complex, real-world scripting engines from data-only attacks against interpreted code. The key idea behind our defense is to allow fine-grained memory access control by analyzing, identifying, isolating, and protecting individual memory regions focusing on their role in code generation at any point in the JavaScript engine. For this we combine automated analysis and instrumentation, compartmentalization, and Intel’s Memory-Protection Keys to secure SpiderMonkey against previous and our new attack. We implement and thoroughly test our implementation using a number of real-world scenarios as well as standard benchmarks. We show that NoJITsu successfully thwarts code-reuse as well as data-only attacks against any part of the scripting engine while offering a modest run-time overhead of only 5%.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 1a2192d3-6dad-4787-9fea-5fb5aa8e87dcCited by top-tier papers9
- You shall not (by)pass!: practical, secure, and fast PKU-based sandboxingAlexios Voulimeneas, Jonas Vinck, Ruben Mechelinck, Stijn VolckaertEuroSys 2022 · 33 citations
- Towards a verified range analysis for JavaScript JITsFraser Brown, John Renner, Andres Nötzli, Sorin Lerner et al.PLDI 2020 · 28 citations
- Icarus: Trustworthy Just-In-Time Compilers with Symbolic Meta-ExecutionNaomi Smith, Abhishek Sharma, John Renner, David Thien et al.SOSP 2024 · 17 citations
- Isolating functions at the hardware limit with virtinesNicholas C. Wanninger, Joshua J. Bowden, Kirtankumar Shetty, Ayush Garg et al.EuroSys 2022 · 17 citations
- CETIS: Retrofitting Intel CET for Generic and Efficient Intra-process Memory IsolationMengyao Xie, Chenggang Wu, Yinqian Zhang, Jiali Xu et al.CCS 2022 · 14 citations
Builds on11
- Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative ExecutionPaul Kocher, Jann Horn, Anders Fogh, Daniel Genkin et al.S&P 2019 · 2,435 citations
- Meltdown: Reading Kernel Memory from User SpaceMoritz Lipp, Michael Schwarz, Daniel Gruss, Thomas Prescher et al.USENIX Security 2018 · 1,456 citations
- Shreds: Fine-Grained Execution Units with Private MemoryYaohui Chen, Sebassujeen Reymondjohnson, Zhichuang Sun, Long LuS&P 2016 · 116 citations
- VTrust: Regaining Trust on Virtual CallsChao Zhang, Dawn Song, Scott A. Carr, Mathias Payer et al.NDSS 2016 · 91 citations
- Leakage-Resilient Layout Randomization for Mobile DevicesKjell Braden, Lucas Davi, Christopher Liebchen, Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi et al.NDSS 2016 · 90 citations
Related papers
- JITGuard: Hardening Just-in-time Compilers with SGXTommaso Frassetto, David Gens, Christopher Liebchen, Ahmad-Reza SadeghiCCS 2017 · 37 citations
- A Call to ARMs: Understanding the Costs and Benefits of JIT Spraying MitigationsWilson Lian, Hovav Shacham, Stefan SavageNDSS 2017 · 7 citations
- What Cannot Be Read, Cannot Be Leveraged? Revisiting Assumptions of JIT-ROP DefensesGiorgi Maisuradze, Michael Backes, Christian RossowUSENIX Security 2016 · 41 citations
- JIT-Picking: Differential Fuzzing of JavaScript EnginesLukas Bernhard, Tobias Scharnowski, Moritz Schloegel, Tim Blazytko et al.CCS 2022 · 42 citations
- FUZZILLI: Fuzzing for JavaScript JIT Compiler VulnerabilitiesSamuel Groß, Simon Koch, Lukas Bernhard, Thorsten Holz et al.NDSS 2023
