From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81913 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2018 22:26:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact elfutils-devel-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: elfutils-devel-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 81902 invoked by uid 89); 19 Oct 2018 22:26:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.100.1 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: gnu.wildebeest.org Received: from wildebeest.demon.nl (HELO gnu.wildebeest.org) (212.238.236.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 22:26:17 +0000 Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (tarox.wildebeest.org [172.31.17.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9269A30008B0 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 00:26:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 672D44047F48; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 00:26:15 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1539987975.3004.11.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] libdwfl: Sanity check partial core file data reads. From: Mark Wielaard To: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 22:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1539528510-15686-1-git-send-email-mark@klomp.org> References: <1539528510-15686-1-git-send-email-mark@klomp.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 (3.22.6-14.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-q4/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 16:48 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > There were two issues when reading note data from a core file. > We didn't check if the data we already had in a buffer was big > enough. And if we did get the data, we should check if we got > everything, or just a part of the data. Pushed to master.