All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Simon Richter <Simon.Richter@hogyros.de>
Cc: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>,
	 Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
	 git@vger.kernel.org,
	 Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] http: use `size_t` for byte position in fwrite_sha1_file
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 21:11:52 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqv771aruf.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <395b47c0-6dc7-4a1b-b547-e5e68e7356f5@hogyros.de> (Simon Richter's message of "Sat, 17 Oct 2026 09:18:41 +0900")

Simon Richter <Simon.Richter@hogyros.de> writes:

>> I agree that changing the type of posn from int to size_t is the
>> right move.
>
> It is a position in a file that is being read as binary data[1], so 
> off_t would be the best choice I think.

Interesting.

The function writes out eltsize * nmemb bytes (both of type
size_t), which means the product could theoretically exceed the
range of size_t.  However, posn is used in xwrite() to offset
into a contiguous in-core buffer starting at ptr:

        ssize_t retval = xwrite(freq->localfile,
                                (char *) ptr + posn,
                                size - posn);

Because we are indexing into an allocated in-core region, any
valid offset must fit within size_t.  If posn were to exceed
the bounds of size_t, the pointer arithmetic ptr + posn would
already be invalid.  As posn only runs up to the allocation
size of the region, it indeed should be measured in size_t, no?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-10-17  4:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-14  6:09 [PATCH 0/5] Address overflows pointed out by Coverity Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-10-14  6:09 ` [PATCH 1/5] archive-tar: guard get_path_prefix against zero-length input Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-10-14  6:09 ` [PATCH 2/5] http: use `size_t` for byte position in fwrite_sha1_file Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-10-16  8:38   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-10-16 14:30     ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-17  0:18       ` Simon Richter
2026-10-17  4:10         ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-17  4:11         ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2026-10-14  6:09 ` [PATCH 3/5] wrapper: reject insanely large byte counts when reading/writing Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-10-14 11:37   ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-14  6:09 ` [PATCH 4/5] git-compat-util: add `signed_mult_overflows` and `mult_overflows` macros Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-10-15  9:27   ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-14  6:09 ` [PATCH 5/5] date: avoid overflow in approxidate relative-time multiplication Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-10-14 21:44   ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-15  9:28   ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-16  8:43 ` [PATCH 0/5] Address overflows pointed out by Coverity Harald Nordgren

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=xmqqv771aruf.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=Simon.Richter@hogyros.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.