Likes Likes:  0
Resultaten 1 tot 2 van de 2
Geen
  1. #1
    Forrest J. Cavalier III
    Platform independent allocating sprintf (was Re: buffer overrun
    Gast
    n/a Berichten
    Berichten zijn liked



    Thread Starter

    Platform independent allocating sprintf (was Re: buffer overrun

    Thamer Al-Harbash <tmh@whitefang.com> wrote

    > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    >
    > > There is an internal #define (HAS_vsnprintf) that causes it to use
    > > vsnprintf() instead of vsprintf(), but this is not enabled by default,
    > > not tested for by the configure script, and not documented.

    >
    > This is a fairly normal (and somewhat frightening) practice I've
    > seen in several popular packages.
    >
    > Last I checked ISC dhcp has a #define for vsnprintf to be
    > vsprintf if the UNIX flavor did not support snprintf.
    >

    [snip]
    >
    > I know that Ted Lemon, the primary author, is aware this. I've
    > mentioned it to him a while ago. I am also not aware of this
    > causing any security holes; although I honestly have not given
    > his source a security audit.
    >
    > There are replacement 'snprintf' packages which avoid
    > this. Patrick Powell's replacement is used in Mutt (a popular
    > MUA) and has a very liberal license.


    If you can't use the allocating vasprintf() and care about security,
    tmpfile() and vfprintf() are available on just about every
    platform, including Windows.

    You have to trust tmpfile() and have a vfprintf() which returns
    a negative integer on filesystem errors (and it will, if it
    complies with IEEE Std 1003.1-2001)

    For speedup, you can "special case" some of the most common % formatting
    (%%, %s, %d, and %u) and use the tmpfile() strategy only when there are
    field width specifiers and unrecognized format specifiers. When you
    do that, the performance is usually acceptable, and you can still use
    all of the "special" formatting you often get with localized fprintf()s.

    Librock has reusable code which uses just that strategy to implement a
    platform-independent "printf into an allocated string". Docs and
    source at:
    http://www.mibsoftware.com/librock/text/vastrprintf.htm

    This function follows the typical easy-to-reuse semantics
    and licensing of the librock_astr functions:

    char *asz = 0; /* Must initialize to 0! */
    librock_astrprintf(&asz,"This is a test %s\n",pszLongString);
    . . .
    librock_astrcat(&asz,"\nAppending another long string....");
    . . .
    librock_astrfree(&asz);

    (The librock source code is Free. No cost. BSD-ish license with no
    advertising clause.)

    Hope it helps!

    Forrest Cavalier III, owner Mib Software


  2. #2
    James Antill
    Platform independent allocating sprintf (was Re: buffer overrun
    Gast
    n/a Berichten
    Berichten zijn liked



    Thread Starter

    Re: Platform independent allocating sprintf (was Re: buffer overrun

    "Forrest J. Cavalier III" <forrest@mibsoftware.com> writes:

    > Thamer Al-Harbash <tmh@whitefang.com> wrote
    >
    > > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    > >
    > > > There is an internal #define (HAS_vsnprintf) that causes it to use
    > > > vsnprintf() instead of vsprintf(), but this is not enabled by default,
    > > > not tested for by the configure script, and not documented.

    > >
    > > This is a fairly normal (and somewhat frightening) practice I've
    > > seen in several popular packages.


    Fairly normal, for the same group of people that use fixed buffers
    everywhere.

    > > Last I checked ISC dhcp has a #define for vsnprintf to be
    > > vsprintf if the UNIX flavor did not support snprintf.
    > >

    > [snip]
    > >
    > > I know that Ted Lemon, the primary author, is aware this. I've
    > > mentioned it to him a while ago. I am also not aware of this
    > > causing any security holes; although I honestly have not given
    > > his source a security audit.


    ISC doesn't write great code, I'm shocked.

    > > There are replacement 'snprintf' packages which avoid
    > > this. Patrick Powell's replacement is used in Mutt (a popular
    > > MUA) and has a very liberal license.

    >
    > If you can't use the allocating vasprintf() and care about security,
    > tmpfile() and vfprintf() are available on just about every
    > platform, including Windows.


    The very simple way to do it is to use vasprintf() or vsnprintf(),
    and hack vsnprintf() for those platforms that still don't have
    vsnprintf() (actually it's often better to just go straight for
    vsnprintf() do to the non-std. of asprintf(), for instance the glibc
    error case is braindead).

    However that only solves some of the problem, all printf()
    implementations aren't equal. For a comparison of some portable
    printf() functions (of varying quality) see the bottom section of...

    http://www.and.org/vstr/comparison.html

    ....although at least a couple of the string libraries there also
    contain portable printf() like (again of varying quality) functions as
    part of their API.

    > For speedup, you can "special case" some of the most common % formatting
    > (%%, %s, %d, and %u) and use the tmpfile() strategy only when there are
    > field width specifiers and unrecognized format specifiers. When you
    > do that, the performance is usually acceptable, and you can still use
    > all of the "special" formatting you often get with localized fprintf()s.
    >
    > Librock has reusable code which uses just that strategy to implement a
    > platform-independent "printf into an allocated string". Docs and
    > source at:
    > http://www.mibsoftware.com/librock/text/vastrprintf.htm


    Well apart from the non-portability, the error checking is wrong on
    the asprintf() calls so you'll SEGV if malloc() fails.

    --
    # James Antill -- james@and.org
    :0:
    * ^From: .*james@and\.org
    /dev/null

Webhostingtalk.nl

Contact

  • Rokin 113-115
  • 1012 KP, Amsterdam
  • Nederland
  • Contact
© Copyright 2001-2026 Webhostingtalk.nl.
Web Statistics