Backport «buffer: ignore negative allocation lengths» to v5.x #7221
+13
−2
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
nodejs-github-bot
added
the
buffer
| @@ -1438,3 +1438,14 @@ assert.equal(Buffer.prototype.parent, undefined); | |||
| assert.equal(Buffer.prototype.offset, undefined); | |||
| assert.equal(SlowBuffer.prototype.parent, undefined); | |||
| assert.equal(SlowBuffer.prototype.offset, undefined); | |||
|
|
|||
| { | |||
| // Test that large negative Buffer length inputs don't affect the pool offset. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just curious, why have we started blocking when no block-scope variables are being used?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@trevnorris Someone suggested it to make sure that the last call in the block here wouldn’t be accidentally moved around in the file/away from the preceding calls that made it fail
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That was @Fishrock123 in #7051 (comment).
|
LGTM. |
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: nodejs#7047 Refs: nodejs#7051 PR-URL: nodejs#7221 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
ChALkeR
pushed a commit
to ChALkeR/io.js
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 19, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: nodejs#7047 Refs: nodejs#7051 PR-URL: nodejs#7221 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
evanlucas
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 23, 2016
Notable changes: This is a security release. All Node.js users should consult the security release summary at https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/june-2016-security-releases for details on patched vulnerabilities. * **buffer** * backport allocUnsafeSlow (Сковорода Никита Андреевич) [#7169](#7169) * ignore negative allocation lengths (Anna Henningsen) [#7221](#7221) * **deps**: backport 3a9bfec from v8 upstream (Ben Noordhuis) [nodejs/node-private#40](https://github.com/nodejs/node-private/pull/40) * Fixes a Buffer overflow vulnerability discovered in v8. More details can be found in the CVE (CVE-2016-1699). PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node-private/pull/51
ChALkeR
pushed a commit
to ChALkeR/io.js
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: nodejs#7047 Refs: nodejs#7051 Refs: nodejs#7221 Refs: nodejs#7475 PR-URL: nodejs#7562 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Nikolai Vavilov <vvnicholas@gmail.com>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: #7047 Refs: #7051 Refs: #7221 Refs: #7475 PR-URL: #7562 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Nikolai Vavilov <vvnicholas@gmail.com>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: #7047 Refs: #7051 Refs: #7221 Refs: #7475 PR-URL: #7562 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Nikolai Vavilov <vvnicholas@gmail.com>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 12, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: #7047 Refs: #7051 Refs: #7221 Refs: #7475 PR-URL: #7562 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Nikolai Vavilov <vvnicholas@gmail.com>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: #7047 Refs: #7051 Refs: #7221 Refs: #7475 PR-URL: #7562 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Nikolai Vavilov <vvnicholas@gmail.com>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2016
Treat negative length arguments to `Buffer()`/`allocUnsafe()` as if they were zero so the allocation does not affect the pool’s offset. Fixes: #7047 Refs: #7051 Refs: #7221 Refs: #7475 PR-URL: #7562 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Nikolai Vavilov <vvnicholas@gmail.com>
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.
This backports #7051 (by @addaleax) to v5.x.
It landed cleanly and is straightforward fix for #7047.
I originally included this in #7169 backport, but that one is semver-minor, and I'm not exactly sure if the next 5.x release will be a semver-minor, but I definitely want this to make it into the next 5.x release.
/cc @jasnell, you already reviewed this backport in #7169, but could you also leave a comment here?
Also /cc @thealphanerd