Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 16:32:36 -0000 (UTC)
From: Tavis Ormandy <>
Subject: Re: OpenSSL X.509 Email Address 4-byte Buffer Overflow
 (CVE-2022-3602), X.509 Email Address Variable Length Buffer Overflow

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.


 _o)            $ lynx
 /\\  _o)  _o)  $ finger
_\_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.