public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "vwebber at msn dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/105357] dereferenced ptr on param stack gets over written
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 09:06:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-105357-4-iVIok5akUY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-105357-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105357
--- Comment #4 from vwebber <vwebber at msn dot com> ---
BTW, what happens in the rare occurrence of a bug report being found valid.
Regards,
Victor Webber
V&T: 408-221-8467
V: 805-924-1953
vwebber@msn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Victor Webber
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2022 2:04 AM
To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: [Bug c/105357] dereferenced ptr on param stack gets over written
Thank you for the comments.
However, the data being overwritten is on the stack in a function which is
called after the problematic scanf() etc are are run.
I would suggest running up GDB and do a break on access of the overwritten
lvalue.
Regards,
Victor Webber
V&T: 408-221-8467
V: 805-924-1953
vwebber@msn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2022 1:07 AM
To: vwebber@msn.com
Subject: [Bug c/105357] dereferenced ptr on param stack gets over written
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgcc.gnu.org%2Fbugzilla%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D105357&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cccc94c12b24440504a1d08da25003521%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637862980067506332%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Xv3EJ%2FCciXIGx8Y9sxvqo1rw9mcvMISwNFnGD5Dbowk%3D&reserved=0
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- You need
better error checking in your code.
scanf can fail and scanf with %s without a size can definitely have a buffer
overflow.
You might be able to detect some of this with -fsanitize=address or by using
valgrind.
This is almost definitely not a bug in GCC.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You reported the bug.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-23 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-23 7:58 [Bug c/105357] New: " vwebber at msn dot com
2022-04-23 8:01 ` [Bug c/105357] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-23 8:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-23 9:04 ` vwebber at msn dot com
2022-04-23 9:06 ` vwebber at msn dot com [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-105357-4-iVIok5akUY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).