Fix formats #19
Merged
Fix formats #19
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
elric1
force-pushed
the
elric1@fix-formats
branch
from
bd5892d to
60c911a
Compare
We just return an error if we don't fit. This shouldn't happen unless there is a mistake in the code, but failing gracefully is vastly superior to having a buffer overflow.
elric1
force-pushed
the
elric1@fix-formats
branch
from
60c911a to
3cf02e6
Compare
emturner
approved these changes
Sep 24, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We solve a buffer overflow here. In these commits, we:
tz_format_*()functions. This allows us to fail if we are going to overflow any buffers. The current documentation in headers says that it is the caller's responsibility to ensure that the buffers are large enough to contain the formatted string, but without some sort of verification it is too easy to make an error. Now, we doublecheck,TZ_BASE58CHECK_BUFFER_SIZE()did not evaluate to the correct number, because the macroTZ_BASE58_BUFFER_SIZE()did not put brackets to ensure that order of operations did not fail. As a drive by, I used_in front of each argument in the macros to make it less likely that the arguments conflict with variables in the existing namespace.