GNU bug report logs - #17455
[PATCH] shred: fix overflow checking of command-line options

Previous Next

Full log

Message #13 received at 17455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> CS.UCLA.EDU>
Cc: 17455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17455: [PATCH] shred: fix overflow checking of command-line
 options
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 20:53:52 +0100

On 05/10/2014 07:42 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> * src/shred.c (main): Limit -n (number of passes) value to
> ULONG_MAX, not to UINT32_MAX, since the vars are unsigned long.
> Limit the -s (file size) value to OFF_T_MAX.
> ---
>  src/shred.c | 9 +++++----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/shred.c b/src/shred.c
> index 607c6be..f4347e0 100644
> --- a/src/shred.c
> +++ b/src/shred.c
> @@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ main (int argc, char **argv)
>            {
>              uintmax_t tmp;
>              if (xstrtoumax (optarg, NULL, 10, &tmp, NULL) != LONGINT_OK
> -                || MIN (UINT32_MAX, SIZE_MAX / sizeof (int)) < tmp)
> +                || MIN (ULONG_MAX, SIZE_MAX / sizeof (int)) <= tmp)

Cool. I think the UNIT32 came from the first version
where ((word32)passes != passes) was used as a hacky
way to detect overflow.

>                {
>                  error (EXIT_FAILURE, 0, _("%s: invalid number of passes"),
>                         quotearg_colon (optarg));
> @@ -1256,9 +1256,10 @@ main (int argc, char **argv)
>  
>          case 's':
>            {
> -            uintmax_t tmp;
> -            if (xstrtoumax (optarg, NULL, 0, &tmp, "cbBkKMGTPEZY0")
> -                != LONGINT_OK)
> +            intmax_t tmp;
> +            if ((xstrtoimax (optarg, NULL, 0, &tmp, "cbBkKMGTPEZY0")
> +                 != LONGINT_OK)
> +                || OFF_T_MAX < tmp)
>                {
>                  error (EXIT_FAILURE, 0, _("%s: invalid file size"),
>                         quotearg_colon (optarg));
> 

Ever since --size was added, it was stored and interpreted internally as off_t,
so the OFF_T_MAX guard is correct.
However the xstrtoumax() was used as a guard against negative numbers
which are now accepted :( I'll fixup with a revert to that bit.

thanks!
Pádraig.

Previous Next

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