changeset 33780:377ed6ab612c v9.0.2110

patch 9.0.2110: [security]: overflow in ex address parsing Commit: https://github.com/vim/vim/commit/060623e4a3bc72b011e7cd92bedb3bfb64e06200 Author: Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org> Date: Tue Nov 14 21:33:29 2023 +0100 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>
author Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org>
date Thu, 16 Nov 2023 22:15:12 +0100
parents 731efc10982a
children c9ecc3bdb3e3
files src/ex_docmd.c src/testdir/test_excmd.vim src/version.c
diffstat 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) [+]
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/src/ex_docmd.c
+++ b/src/ex_docmd.c
@@ -4644,7 +4644,7 @@ 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;
--- a/src/testdir/test_excmd.vim
+++ b/src/testdir/test_excmd.vim
@@ -724,5 +724,9 @@ 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
--- a/src/version.c
+++ b/src/version.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static char *(features[]) =
 static int included_patches[] =
 {   /* Add new patch number below this line */
 /**/
+    2110,
+/**/
     2109,
 /**/
     2108,