| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_control is missing a field for LOBLKSIZE |
| Date: | 2014-06-04 17:57:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20140604175719.GK2556@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> There are at least two places in inv_api.c where we have
> "Assert(pagelen <= LOBLKSIZE)" that is protecting a subsequent memcpy
> into a local variable of size LOBLKSIZE, so that the only thing standing
> between us and a stack-smash security issue that's trivially exploitable
> in production builds is that on-disk data conforms to our expectation
> about LOBLKSIZE. I think it's definitely worth promoting these checks
> to regular runtime-if-test-and-elog.
Agreed. Promoting that to a run-time check seems well worth it to me.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-06-04 18:10:22 | Re: BUG #8673: Could not open file "pg_multixact/members/xxxx" on slave during hot_standby |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-04 17:50:47 | Re: pg_control is missing a field for LOBLKSIZE |