GNU bug report logs - #14917
Missing range check in fxcopy-bit can give SIGABRT

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#14917: closed (Missing range check in fxcopy-bit can give
 SIGABRT)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 07:36:01 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:35:44 +0200
with message-id <87oa6v3sfj.fsf <at> pobox.com>
and subject line Re: bug#14917: Missing range check in fxcopy-bit can give SIGABRT
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #14917,
regarding Missing range check in fxcopy-bit can give SIGABRT
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
14917: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=14917
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Göran Weinholt <goran <at> weinholt.se>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: Missing range check in fxcopy-bit can give SIGABRT
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 08:57:29 +0200

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello schemers,

the fxcopy-bit procedure from (rnrs) is missing some range checks. It
can return a non-fixnum:

scheme@(guile-user)> (import (rnrs))
scheme@(guile-user)> (fxcopy-bit 0 (fixnum-width) 1)
$1 = 9223372036854775808

It can also crash the guile process, which is somewhat surprising for a
fixnum procedure:

scheme@(guile-user)> (import (rnrs))
scheme@(guile-user)> (fxcopy-bit 0 100000000000 0)
FATAL: memory error in realloc
Aborted

Here's an alternative error message:

scheme@(guile-user)> (import (rnrs))
scheme@(guile-user)> (fxcopy-bit 0 1000000000000 0)
gmp: overflow in mpz type
Aborted

Other implementations of fxcopy-bit usually check that the third
argument is 0 or 1, but I'm not sure that is required.

There's also a bitwise-copy-bit procedure that is similary affected.
Tested with Guile 2.0.9.40-824b-dirty on an amd64 system.

Regards,

-- 
Göran Weinholt <goran <at> weinholt.se>
"Mr. Crane, please remember you're not required to answer any of
Lt. Tragg's questions. As a matter of fact, don't even discuss the
weather with him, he can be very persuasive." -- Perry Mason

[Message part 4 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

[Message part 5 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: Göran Weinholt <goran <at> weinholt.se>
Cc: 14917-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#14917: Missing range check in fxcopy-bit can give SIGABRT
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:35:44 +0200

Howdy :)

Three years later, this is now fixed and will be in 2.1.4.  I think
we'll cherry-pick it back to 2.0.12 too.

Cheers,

Andy

On Sat 20 Jul 2013 08:57, Göran Weinholt <goran <at> weinholt.se> writes:

> Hello schemers,
>
> the fxcopy-bit procedure from (rnrs) is missing some range checks. It
> can return a non-fixnum:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (import (rnrs))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (fxcopy-bit 0 (fixnum-width) 1)
> $1 = 9223372036854775808
>
> It can also crash the guile process, which is somewhat surprising for a
> fixnum procedure:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (import (rnrs))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (fxcopy-bit 0 100000000000 0)
> FATAL: memory error in realloc
> Aborted
>
> Here's an alternative error message:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (import (rnrs))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (fxcopy-bit 0 1000000000000 0)
> gmp: overflow in mpz type
> Aborted
>
> Other implementations of fxcopy-bit usually check that the third
> argument is 0 or 1, but I'm not sure that is required.
>
> There's also a bitwise-copy-bit procedure that is similary affected.
> Tested with Guile 2.0.9.40-824b-dirty on an amd64 system.
>
> Regards,

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.