Additonal safeguard for the ʟᴘ64 memory model : prefer size_t over int when appropriate+check all malloc() calls+other fixes #45
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
ytrezq
changed the title
ytrezq
changed the title
…prensenting length in core functions instead of signed int in order to prevent possibly existing overflows for crafted requests. This should also fix buffer overflows in the case someone run that software on a 16 bit x86 with an already supported ᴏꜱ.
…ams continue running.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I took care to not use size_t when the signing bit might be required (at least if I didn’t mistake).
This adds an additional (but probably unnecessary) safeguard. As well fix probable issues for 16 bits x86 machines (in the case they use an ᴏꜱ already supported by exim) .
At least this doesn’t hurt (until all return values of
malloc()are checked which is something I fixed too).Only core lib functions and the variables that use them are covered by this change (definitely unnecessary for the others). But I can add them too.
If despite testing I did something wrong, _please notice me_ of course.
This version leaves code that let the exim daemon continue running while still handling allocation errors.
I also replaced direct calls to
free()withstore_free()