CWE

Common Weakness Enumeration

A community-developed list of SW & HW weaknesses that can become vulnerabilities
New to CWE? click here!
CWE Most Important Hardware Weaknesses
CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Weaknesses
Home > CWE List > CWE-1298: Hardware Logic Contains Race Conditions (4.16)  
ID

CWE-1298: Hardware Logic Contains Race Conditions

Weakness ID: 1298
Vulnerability Mapping: ALLOWED This CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities
Abstraction: Base Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
View customized information:
For users who are interested in more notional aspects of a weakness. Example: educators, technical writers, and project/program managers. For users who are concerned with the practical application and details about the nature of a weakness and how to prevent it from happening. Example: tool developers, security researchers, pen-testers, incident response analysts. For users who are mapping an issue to CWE/CAPEC IDs, i.e., finding the most appropriate CWE for a specific issue (e.g., a CVE record). Example: tool developers, security researchers. For users who wish to see all available information for the CWE/CAPEC entry. For users who want to customize what details are displayed.
×

Edit Custom Filter


+ Description
A race condition in the hardware logic results in undermining security guarantees of the system.
+ Extended Description

A race condition in logic circuits typically occurs when a logic gate gets inputs from signals that have traversed different paths while originating from the same source. Such inputs to the gate can change at slightly different times in response to a change in the source signal. This results in a timing error or a glitch (temporary or permanent) that causes the output to change to an unwanted state before settling back to the desired state. If such timing errors occur in access control logic or finite state machines that are implemented in security sensitive flows, an attacker might exploit them to circumvent existing protections.

+ Common Consequences
Section HelpThis table specifies different individual consequences associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to achieve a different impact.
Scope Impact Likelihood
Access Control

Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism; Gain Privileges or Assume Identity; Alter Execution Logic

+ Potential Mitigations

Phase: Architecture and Design

Adopting design practices that encourage designers to recognize and eliminate race conditions, such as Karnaugh maps, could result in the decrease in occurrences of race conditions.

Phase: Implementation

Logic redundancy can be implemented along security critical paths to prevent race conditions. To avoid metastability, it is a good practice in general to default to a secure state in which access is not given to untrusted agents.
+ Relationships
Section Help This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user may want to explore.
+ Relevant to the view "Research Concepts" (CWE-1000)
Nature Type ID Name
ChildOf Class Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource. 362 Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
Section Help This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user may want to explore.
+ Relevant to the view "Hardware Design" (CWE-1194)
Nature Type ID Name
MemberOf Category Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. 1199 General Circuit and Logic Design Concerns
+ Modes Of Introduction
Section HelpThe different Modes of Introduction provide information about how and when this weakness may be introduced. The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which introduction may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the given phase.
Phase Note
Architecture and Design
Implementation
+ Applicable Platforms
Section HelpThis listing shows possible areas for which the given weakness could appear. These may be for specific named Languages, Operating Systems, Architectures, Paradigms, Technologies, or a class of such platforms. The platform is listed along with how frequently the given weakness appears for that instance.

Languages

Verilog (Undetermined Prevalence)

VHDL (Undetermined Prevalence)

Technologies

Class: System on Chip (Undetermined Prevalence)

+ Demonstrative Examples

Example 1

The code below shows a 2x1 multiplexor using logic gates. Though the code shown below results in the minimum gate solution, it is disjoint and causes glitches.

(bad code)
Example Language: Verilog 
// 2x1 Multiplexor using logic-gates

module glitchEx(
input wire in0, in1, sel,
output wire z
);

wire not_sel;
wire and_out1, and_out2;

assign not_sel = ~sel;
assign and_out1 = not_sel & in0;
assign and_out2 = sel & in1;

// Buggy line of code:
assign z = and_out1 | and_out2; // glitch in signal z

endmodule

The buggy line of code, commented above, results in signal 'z' periodically changing to an unwanted state. Thus, any logic that references signal 'z' may access it at a time when it is in this unwanted state. This line should be replaced with the line shown below in the Good Code Snippet which results in signal 'z' remaining in a continuous, known, state. Reference for the above code, along with waveforms for simulation can be found in the references below.

(good code)
Example Language: Verilog 
assign z <= and_out1 or and_out2 or (in0 and in1);

This line of code removes the glitch in signal z.


Example 2

The example code is taken from the DMA (Direct Memory Access) module of the buggy OpenPiton SoC of HACK@DAC'21. The DMA contains a finite-state machine (FSM) for accessing the permissions using the physical memory protection (PMP) unit.

PMP provides secure regions of physical memory against unauthorized access. It allows an operating system or a hypervisor to define a series of physical memory regions and then set permissions for those regions, such as read, write, and execute permissions. When a user tries to access a protected memory area (e.g., through DMA), PMP checks the access of a PMP address (e.g., pmpaddr_i) against its configuration (pmpcfg_i). If the access violates the defined permissions (e.g., CTRL_ABORT), the PMP can trigger a fault or an interrupt. This access check is implemented in the pmp parametrized module in the below code snippet. The below code assumes that the state of the pmpaddr_i and pmpcfg_i signals will not change during the different DMA states (i.e., CTRL_IDLE to CTRL_DONE) while processing a DMA request (via dma_ctrl_reg). The DMA state machine is implemented using a case statement (not shown in the code snippet).

(bad code)
Example Language: Verilog 
module dma # (...)(...);
...
input [7:0] [16-1:0] pmpcfg_i;
input logic [16-1:0][53:0] pmpaddr_i;
...
//// Save the input command
always @ (posedge clk_i or negedge rst_ni)
begin: save_inputs
if (!rst_ni)
begin
...
end
else
begin
if (dma_ctrl_reg == CTRL_IDLE || dma_ctrl_reg == CTRL_DONE)
begin
...
end
end
end // save_inputs
...
// Load/store PMP check
pmp #(
.XLEN ( 64 ),
.PMP_LEN ( 54 ),
.NR_ENTRIES ( 16 )
) i_pmp_data (
.addr_i ( pmp_addr_reg ),
.priv_lvl_i ( riscv::PRIV_LVL_U ),
.access_type_i ( pmp_access_type_reg ),
// Configuration
.conf_addr_i ( pmpaddr_i ),
.conf_i ( pmpcfg_i ),
.allow_o ( pmp_data_allow )
);
endmodule

However, the above code [REF-1394] allows the values of pmpaddr_i and pmpcfg_i to be changed through DMA's input ports. This causes a race condition and will enable attackers to access sensitive addresses that the configuration is not associated with.

Attackers can initialize the DMA access process (CTRL_IDLE) using pmpcfg_i for a non-privileged PMP address (pmpaddr_i). Then during the loading state (CTRL_LOAD), attackers can replace the non-privileged address in pmpaddr_i with a privileged address without the requisite authorized access configuration.

To fix this issue (see [REF-1395]), the value of the pmpaddr_i and pmpcfg_i signals should be stored in local registers (pmpaddr_reg and pmpcfg_reg at the start of the DMA access process and the pmp module should reference those registers instead of the signals directly. The values of the registers can only be updated at the start (CTRL_IDLE) or the end (CTRL_DONE) of the DMA access process, which prevents attackers from changing the PMP address in the middle of the DMA access process.

(good code)
Example Language: Verilog 
module dma # (...)(...);
...
input [7:0] [16-1:0] pmpcfg_i;
input logic [16-1:0][53:0] pmpaddr_i;
...
reg [7:0] [16-1:0] pmpcfg_reg;
reg [16-1:0][53:0] pmpaddr_reg;
...
//// Save the input command
always @ (posedge clk_i or negedge rst_ni)
begin: save_inputs
if (!rst_ni)
begin
...
pmpaddr_reg <= 'b0 ;
pmpcfg_reg <= 'b0 ;
end
else
begin
if (dma_ctrl_reg == CTRL_IDLE || dma_ctrl_reg == CTRL_DONE)
begin
...
pmpaddr_reg <= pmpaddr_i;
pmpcfg_reg <= pmpcfg_i;
end
end
end // save_inputs
...
// Load/store PMP check
pmp #(
.XLEN ( 64 ),
.PMP_LEN ( 54 ),
.NR_ENTRIES ( 16 )
) i_pmp_data (
.addr_i ( pmp_addr_reg ),
.priv_lvl_i ( riscv::PRIV_LVL_U ), // we intend to apply filter on
// DMA always, so choose the least privilege .access_type_i ( pmp_access_type_reg ),
// Configuration
.conf_addr_i ( pmpaddr_reg ),
.conf_i ( pmpcfg_reg ),
.allow_o ( pmp_data_allow )
);
endmodule

+ Memberships
Section HelpThis MemberOf Relationships table shows additional CWE Categories and Views that reference this weakness as a member. This information is often useful in understanding where a weakness fits within the context of external information sources.
Nature Type ID Name
MemberOf CategoryCategory - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. 1401 Comprehensive Categorization: Concurrency
+ Vulnerability Mapping Notes

Usage: ALLOWED

(this CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities)

Reason: Acceptable-Use

Rationale:

This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.

Comments:

Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.
+ References
[REF-1115] Meher Krishna Patel. "FPGA designs with Verilog (section 7.4 Glitches)". <https://verilogguide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/verilog/fsm.html>.
[REF-1116] Clifford E. Cummings. "Non-Blocking Assignments in Verilog Synthesis, Coding Styles that Kill!". 2000. <http://www.sunburst-design.com/papers/CummingsSNUG2000SJ_NBA.pdf>.
+ Content History
+ Submissions
Submission Date Submitter Organization
2020-02-10
(CWE 4.2, 2020-08-20) 		Arun Kanuparthi, Hareesh Khattri, Parbati Kumar Manna, Narasimha Kumar V Mangipudi Intel Corporation
+ Contributions
Contribution Date Contributor Organization
2023-11-29 Chen Chen, Rahul Kande, Jeyavijayan Rajendran Texas A&M University
suggested demonstrative example
2023-11-29 Shaza Zeitouni, Mohamadreza Rostami, Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi Technical University of Darmstadt
suggested demonstrative example
+ Modifications
Modification Date Modifier Organization
2021-07-20 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Related_Attack_Patterns
2023-04-27 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Relationships
2023-06-29 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Mapping_Notes
2024-02-29
(CWE 4.14, 2024-02-29) 		CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Demonstrative_Examples, References
Page Last Updated: November 19, 2024
 

Use of the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE™) and the associated references from this website are subject to the Terms of Use. CWE is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and managed by the Homeland Security Systems Engineering and Development Institute (HSSEDI) which is operated by The MITRE Corporation (MITRE). Copyright © 2006–2024, The MITRE Corporation. CWE, CWSS, CWRAF, and the CWE logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation.