[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#8301) signed/unsigned confusion in ber_get_next()
- To: openldap-its@OpenLDAP.org
- Subject: Re: (ITS#8301) signed/unsigned confusion in ber_get_next()
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 12:07:19 +0000
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated (OpenLDAP-ITS)
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:12:26AM +0000, email@example.com wrote:
>> Hi, the following will assert in liblber on i386 (and it should be possible to
>> craft a similar one for 64bit, I think):
>> echo 'CoSSoJKSCg==' | base64 -d | ~/code/openldap/libraries/liblber/etest .
> ITYM dtest?
> slapd's sane default setting for sb_max_incoming appears to mitigate
> most of the potential security impact of this one.
But I guess we need to reject any len values that exceed the range of a signed
ber_len_t, since many liblber functions can only return a ber_slen_t result.
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/