TypeError: run_initializer() takes 1 positional argument but 6 were given
See original GitHub issueI have this very simple C program with a buffer overflow on the stack:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
char buf[32];
strcpy(buf,argv[1]);
printf("Input:%s\n",buf);
return 0;
}
I compiled it using gcc -g -fno-stack-protector -z execstack -o csbo csbo.c
. Now I have the following code in angr:
def main():
# Tell angr to go through strcpy
proj = angr.Project("./csbo", exclude_sim_procedures_list=["strcpy"])
options = {
angr.options.SYMBOL_FILL_UNCONSTRAINED_MEMORY,
angr.options.SYMBOL_FILL_UNCONSTRAINED_REGISTERS,
angr.options.CONSTRAINT_TRACKING_IN_SOLVER
}
options.update(angr.options.unicorn)
state = proj.factory.entry_state(
add_options=options,
remove_options={
angr.options.LAZY_SOLVES,
angr.options.SYMBOLIC_MEMORY_NO_SINGLEVALUE_OPTIMIZATIONS
}
)
# We're looking for unconstrained paths
sm = proj.factory.simulation_manager(state, save_unconstrained=True)
# Step execution until we find unconstrained paths
while sm.active and not sm.unconstrained:
sm.step()
print(sm)
# Make a copy of the state
if not sm.unconstrained:
raise Exception("Uh oh! Did not find any unconstrained paths!")
s = sm.unconstrained[0].copy()
print(s)
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
In the logs I can see that it encounters unconstrained paths. After some time, it fails with the following trace:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "solve2.py", line 49, in <module>
main()
File "solve2.py", line 36, in main
sm.step()
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/sim_manager.py", line 343, in step
successors = self.step_state(state, successor_func=successor_func, **run_args)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/sim_manager.py", line 381, in step_state
successors = self.successors(state, successor_func=successor_func, **run_args)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/sim_manager.py", line 420, in successors
return self._project.factory.successors(state, **run_args)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/factory.py", line 54, in successors
return self.project.engines.successors(*args, **kwargs)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/engines/hub.py", line 128, in successors
r = engine.process(state, **kwargs)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/engines/hook.py", line 55, in process
return self.project.factory.procedure_engine.process(state, procedure, force_addr=force_addr, **kwargs)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/engines/procedure.py", line 31, in process
force_addr=force_addr)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/engines/engine.py", line 60, in process
self._process(new_state, successors, *args, **kwargs)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/engines/procedure.py", line 65, in _process
inst = procedure.execute(state, successors, ret_to=ret_to)
File "/home/vivin/Projects/rampage/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/angr/sim_procedure.py", line 182, in execute
r = getattr(inst, inst.run_func)(*sim_args, **inst.kwargs)
TypeError: run_initializer() takes 1 positional argument but 6 were given
The binary takes in a command-line argument, but I have not specified it as symbolic. I was just curious to see how angr would behave in this situation; specifically whether it could tell that the unconstrained paths could be caused by the command-line argument. I’m not sure if that’s the reason for this particular error or not.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 4 years ago
- Comments:5 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
TypeError: method() takes 1 positional argument but 2 were ...
In Python, this: my_object.method("foo") ...is syntactic sugar, which the interpreter translates behind the scenes into:
Read more >TypeError: takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given
The Python TypeError: takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given occurs for multiple reasons: forgetting to specify the `self` argument in ...
Read more >Typeerror: takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given
To solve this ” Typeerror: takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given ” is by adding self argument for each method inside...
Read more >Python takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given Solution
When you call a method associated with an object, there is one positional argument that is supplied by default: self.
Read more >TypeError: __init__() takes 1 positional argument but 5 were ...
Try naming arguments, from the documentation, it should work (of course, adapt your values): import pymysql # Connect to the database ...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
ah. well. this one is pretty much just your fault.
you didn’t provide any command line arguments, so this means that argv is just the name of the program and argc is 1. So your program is dereferencing null and you’re not seeing it because you added
SYMBOL_FILL_UNCONSTRAINED_MEMORY
. Then, this particular error pops up because there is a path that overwrites exactly two of the bytes of the return address, so the first one is anything-but-null and the second is null. This is 255 possible addresses, i.e. few enough for angr to explore them all explicitly. Because the original return address was to the externs segment, this means that we now have states pointing at every address in the first 256 bytes of the externs segment (except the first one), and they’re going to try to run the hooked procedures at those addresses. It’s a gigantic shitshow, and this is one of the things that falls out of it. I guess there could be a better error message, but this is just a disaster.With the new commit, this eventuality will result in
SimShadowStackError("I can't emulate this consequence of stack smashing")
, which will be caught and put into the errored list, and the script finishes correctly.