From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>,
Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>
Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
matz@gcc.gnu.org, Scott Gayou <sgayou@redhat.com>,
Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>,
gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demangling of ancient mangling schemes
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 21:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADzB+2n6kz=9zLzordWp3gqW+hrLHBhQJ-5p5Lt8Stqv97=nBw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2928eac9-9363-ddb8-21eb-df878d2d4837@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 272 bytes --]
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:14 AM Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Looks good to me. Independently, do you see a reason not to disable the
> old demangler entirely?
Like so. Does anyone object to this? These mangling schemes haven't
been relevant in decades.
[-- Attachment #2: old-dem-off.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1221 bytes --]
commit 175323701ad923aa47f25e1e37fa1f3c487dc5ea
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Nov 20 01:17:48 2018 -0500
* cplus-dem.c (cplus_demangle): Turn off the old demangler.
diff --git a/libiberty/cplus-dem.c b/libiberty/cplus-dem.c
index 4f29d54d089..8ee23b2fe71 100644
--- a/libiberty/cplus-dem.c
+++ b/libiberty/cplus-dem.c
@@ -267,6 +267,7 @@ const struct demangler_engine libiberty_demanglers[] =
"Automatic selection based on executable"
}
,
+#ifdef OLD_DEMANGLERS
{
GNU_DEMANGLING_STYLE_STRING,
gnu_demangling,
@@ -297,10 +298,11 @@ const struct demangler_engine libiberty_demanglers[] =
"EDG style demangling"
}
,
+#endif
{
GNU_V3_DEMANGLING_STYLE_STRING,
gnu_v3_demangling,
- "GNU (g++) V3 ABI-style demangling"
+ "GNU (g++) V3 (Itanium C++ ABI) style demangling"
}
,
{
@@ -915,8 +917,12 @@ cplus_demangle (const char *mangled, int options)
return ret;
}
+#if OLD_DEMANGLERS
+ /* People have been busily breaking the old demangler with fuzzers
+ (CVE-2018-12641 etc), so let's turn it off. */
ret = internal_cplus_demangle (work, mangled);
squangle_mop_up (work);
+#endif
return (ret);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-06 21:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-30 8:38 RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler Nick Clifton
2018-11-30 8:42 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-11-30 10:27 ` Nick Clifton
2018-11-30 13:46 ` Michael Matz
2018-11-30 14:57 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2018-12-02 0:49 ` Cary Coutant
2018-12-03 14:53 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-03 22:00 ` Joseph Myers
2018-11-30 13:56 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2018-11-30 14:03 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-11-30 17:41 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v3] Nick Clifton
2018-11-30 17:49 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-11-30 18:19 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-03 10:28 ` Richard Biener
2018-12-03 14:45 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-03 18:49 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-04 14:00 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v4] Nick Clifton
2018-12-04 15:02 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-04 16:57 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v5] Nick Clifton
2018-12-04 17:08 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-06 11:12 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-06 18:04 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-07 16:17 ` H.J. Lu
2018-12-07 16:25 ` [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT to 1536 H.J. Lu
2018-12-10 14:52 ` Michael Matz
2018-12-10 15:10 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 15:34 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-11 0:33 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-11 6:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-11 11:05 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-11 14:26 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-11 15:07 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-11 10:34 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-10 15:12 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-10 15:18 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 15:26 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-10 15:35 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 18:20 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-10 18:55 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 23:47 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-10 15:18 ` David Malcolm
2018-12-10 15:31 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-06 16:14 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v5] Jason Merrill
2018-12-06 21:22 ` Jason Merrill [this message]
2018-12-07 10:27 ` RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demangling of ancient mangling schemes Nick Clifton
2018-12-07 10:40 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-07 16:11 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-07 17:49 ` Tom Tromey
2018-12-07 21:00 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-14 22:39 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-16 4:50 ` Simon Marchi
2018-12-07 16:28 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-07 11:37 ` Richard Biener
2018-12-07 15:49 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-10 1:04 ` Eric Gallager
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='CADzB+2n6kz=9zLzordWp3gqW+hrLHBhQJ-5p5Lt8Stqv97=nBw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=iant@google.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=matz@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=sgayou@redhat.com \
--cc=tom@tromey.com \
/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).