Fix arithmetic debug assertions in elf #260
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
m4b
approved these changes
Feb 15, 2021
| @@ -406,9 +406,9 @@ if_sylvan! { | |||
| fn hash_len(bytes: &[u8], offset: usize, machine: u16, ctx: Ctx) -> error::Result<usize> { | |||
| // Based on readelf code. | |||
| let nchain = if (machine == header::EM_FAKE_ALPHA || machine == header::EM_S390) && ctx.container.is_big() { | |||
| bytes.pread_with::<u64>(offset + 4, ctx.le)? as usize | |||
| bytes.pread_with::<u64>(offset.saturating_add(4), ctx.le)? as usize | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think there was a concern about this before about what this would mean if it overflows, but i suppose saturating add is best here
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds a new fuzzing harness that covers most of the ELF module and fixes a few overflow assertions.
saturating_adds should be fine since all of the edge cases concern sizes that are bounds-checked later.(Xref #110)