[libcxx-commits] [libcxx] [libc++][hardening] Finish documenting hardening. (PR #92021)

[Mark de Wever via libcxx-commits]

================
@@ -72,17 +75,301 @@ to control the level by passing **one** of the following options to the compiler
 Notes for vendors
 -----------------
 
-Vendors can set the default hardening mode by providing ``LIBCXX_HARDENING_MODE``
-as a configuration option, with the possible values of ``none``, ``fast``,
-``extensive`` and ``debug``. The default value is ``none`` which doesn't enable
-any hardening checks (this mode is sometimes called the ``unchecked`` mode).
+Vendors can set the default hardening mode by providing
+``LIBCXX_HARDENING_MODE`` as a configuration option, with the possible values of
+``none``, ``fast``, ``extensive`` and ``debug``. The default value is ``none``
+which doesn't enable any hardening checks (this mode is sometimes called the
+``unchecked`` mode).
 
 This option controls both the hardening mode that the precompiled library is
 built with and the default hardening mode that users will build with. If set to
 ``none``, the precompiled library will not contain any assertions, and user code
 will default to building without assertions.
 
-Iterator bounds checking
-------------------------
+Vendors can also override the termination handler by :ref:`providing a custom
+header <override-assertion-handler>`.
 
-TODO(hardening)
+Assertion categories
+====================
+
+Inside the library, individual assertions are grouped into different
+*categories*. Each hardening mode enables a different set of assertion
+categories; categories provide an additional layer of abstraction that makes it
+easier to reason about the high-level semantics of a hardening mode.
+
+- ``valid-element-access`` -- checks that any attempts to access a container
+  element, whether through the container object or through an iterator, are
+  valid and do not attempt to go out of bounds or otherwise access
+  a non-existent element. For iterator checks to work, bounded iterators must be
+  enabled in the ABI. Types like ``optional`` and ``function`` are considered
+  one-element containers for the purposes of this check.
+
+- ``valid-input-range`` -- checks that ranges (whether expressed as an iterator
+  pair, an iterator and a sentinel, an iterator and a count, or
+  a ``std::range``) given as input to library functions are valid:
+  - the sentinel is reachable from the begin iterator;
+  - TODO(hardening): both iterators refer to the same container.
+
+  ("input" here refers to "an input given to an algorithm", not to an iterator
+  category)
+
+  Violating assertions in this category leads to an out-of-bounds access.
+
+- ``non-null`` -- checks that the pointer being dereferenced is not null. On
+  most modern platforms zero address does not refer to an actual location in
+  memory, so a null pointer dereference would not compromize the memory security
+  of a program (however, it is still undefined behavior that can result in
+  strange errors due to compiler optimizations).
+
+- ``non-overlapping-ranges`` -- for functions that take several ranges as
+  arguments, checks that the given ranges do not overlap.
+
+- ``valid-deallocation`` -- checks that an attempt to deallocate memory is valid
+  (e.g. the given object was allocated by the given allocator). Violating this
+  category typically results in a memory leak.
+
+- ``valid-external-api-call`` -- checks that a call to an external API doesn't
+  fail in an unexpected manner. This includes triggering documented cases of
+  undefined behavior in an external library (like attempting to unlock an
+  unlocked mutex in pthreads). Any API external to the library falls under this
+  category (from system calls to compiler intrinsics). We generally don't expect
+  these failures to compromize memory safety or otherwise create an immediate
+  security issue.
+
+- ``compatible-allocator`` -- checks any operations that exchange nodes between
+  containers to make sure the containers have compatible allocators.
+
+- ``argument-within-domain`` -- checks that the given argument is within the
+  domain of valid arguments for the function. Violating this typically produces
+  an incorrect result (e.g. the clamp algorithm returns the original value
+  without clamping it due to incorrect functors) or puts an object into an
+  invalid state (e.g. a string view where only a subset of elements is possible
+  to access). This category is for assertions violating which doesn't cause any
+  immediate issues in the library -- whatever the consequences are, they will
+  happen in the user code.
+
+- ``pedantic`` -- checks prerequisites that are imposed by the Standard, but
+  violating which happens to be benign in our implementation.
+
+- ``semantic-requirement`` -- checks that the given argument satisfies the
+  semantic requirements imposed by the Standard. Typically, there is no simple
+  way to completely prove that a semantic requirement is satisfied; thus, this
+  would often be a heuristic check and it might be quite expensive.
+
+- ``internal`` -- checks that internal invariants of the library hold. These
+  assertions don't depend on user input.
+
+- ``uncategorized`` -- for assertions that haven't been properly classified yet.
+  This is an escape hatch used for some existing assertions in the library; all
+  new code should have its assertions properly classified.
+
+Mapping between the hardening modes and the assertion categories
+================================================================
+
+.. list-table::
+    :header-rows: 1
+    :widths: auto
+
+    * - Category name
+      - ``fast``
+      - ``extensive``
+      - ``debug``
+    * - ``valid-element-access``
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``valid-input-range``
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``non-null``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``non-overlapping-ranges``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``valid-deallocation``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``valid-external-api-call``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``compatible-allocator``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``argument-within-domain``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``pedantic``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+    * - ``semantic-requirement``
+      - ❌
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+    * - ``internal``
+      - ❌
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+    * - ``uncategorized``
+      - ❌
+      - ✅
+      - ✅
+
+.. note::
+
+  At the moment, each subsequent hardening mode is a strict superset of the
+  previous one (in other words, each subsequent mode only enables additional
+  assertion categories without disabling any), but this won't necessarily be
+  true for any hardening modes that might potentially be added in the future.
+
+Hardening assertion failure
+===========================
+
+In production modes (``fast`` and ``extensive``), a hardening assertion failure
+immediately traps the program. This is the safest approach that also minimizes
+the code size penalty as the failure handler maps to a single instruction. The
+downside is that the failure provides no additional details other than the stack
+trace (which might also be affected by optimizations).
+
+TODO(hardening): describe ``__builtin_verbose_trap`` once we can use it.
+
+In the ``debug`` mode, an assertion failure terminates the program in an
+unspecified manner and also outputs the associated error message to the error
+output. This is less secure and increases the size of the binary (among other
+things, to store the error message strings) but makes the failure easier to
+debug. It also allows us to test the error messages in our test suite.
+
+.. _override-assertion-handler:
+
+Overriding the assertion failure handler
+----------------------------------------
+
+Vendors can override the default termination handler mechanism by following
+these steps:
----------------
mordante wrote:

I feel stating that "users cannot override this" does provide information. After reading that they can stop searching how they can override this. For me it makes it easier to point to the documentation when users post bug reports.

I was not aware users can't override this handle.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92021