[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tju633$t4h$1@ciao.gmane.io>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 16:32:36 -0000 (UTC)
From: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...il.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: OpenSSL X.509 Email Address 4-byte Buffer Overflow
(CVE-2022-3602), X.509 Email Address Variable Length Buffer Overflow
(CVE-2022-3786)
On 2022-11-02, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> In Rust, assuming you wrote normal safe Rust[0], and you had code that
> overran a buffer on the stack, you'd get a panic() -- which is roughly
> an abort (there's even a mode where it literally is an abort. By
> default it unwinds and runs destructors and such). As a general rule,
> bounds check issues aren't caught at compile time (in contrast with
> temporal safety, which mostly is enforced at compile time.)
>
Got it - thanks! It seems like in the specific case of non-exploitable
overflows, rust wouldn't have made too much difference (abort() vs
panic())... although obviously that doesn't mean other issues wouldn't
have been mitigated.
Tavis.
--
_o) $ lynx lock.cmpxchg8b.com
/\\ _o) _o) $ finger taviso@....org
_\_V _( ) _( ) @taviso
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
