vim/backport-CVE-2023-48235.patch
wangjiang a78e0c461f fix CVE-2023-48231 CVE-2023-48233 CVE-2023-48234 CVE-2023-48235 CVE-2023-48236 CVE-2023-48237
(cherry picked from commit 1af01b9e738648ca3206f1873ba703f897a7b947)
2023-11-22 15:37:10 +08:00

51 lines
1.5 KiB
Diff

From 060623e4a3bc72b011e7cd92bedb3bfb64e06200 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:33:29 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] patch 9.0.2110: [security]: overflow in ex address parsing
Problem: [security]: overflow in ex address parsing
Solution: Verify that lnum is positive, before substracting from
LONG_MAX
[security]: overflow in ex address parsing
When parsing relative ex addresses one may unintentionally cause an
overflow (because LONG_MAX - lnum will overflow for negative addresses).
So verify that lnum is actually positive before doing the overflow
check.
Signed-off-by: Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org>
---
src/ex_docmd.c | 2 +-
src/testdir/test_excmd.vim | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/ex_docmd.c b/src/ex_docmd.c
index 06837ac92c55c..01d411a632ccf 100644
--- a/src/ex_docmd.c
+++ b/src/ex_docmd.c
@@ -4603,7 +4603,7 @@ get_address(
lnum -= n;
else
{
- if (n >= LONG_MAX - lnum)
+ if (lnum >= 0 && n >= LONG_MAX - lnum)
{
emsg(_(e_line_number_out_of_range));
goto error;
diff --git a/src/testdir/test_excmd.vim b/src/testdir/test_excmd.vim
index 3637351f636c0..47fc26726d5e6 100644
--- a/src/testdir/test_excmd.vim
+++ b/src/testdir/test_excmd.vim
@@ -725,5 +725,9 @@ func Test_write_after_rename()
bwipe!
endfunc
+" catch address lines overflow
+func Test_ex_address_range_overflow()
+ call assert_fails(':--+foobar', 'E492:')
+endfunc
" vim: shiftwidth=2 sts=2 expandtab