Skip to content

fix: the rfc1867 multipart form data parser performs... in rfc1867.c #21923

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
orbisai0security wants to merge 1 commit into from
+5 −1
Closed

fix: the rfc1867 multipart form data parser performs... in rfc1867.c #21923

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 5 additions & 1 deletion main/rfc1867.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -69,7 +69,8 @@ static void normalize_protected_variable(char *varname) /* {{{ */

/* and remove it */
if (s != varname) {
memmove(varname, s, strlen(s)+1);
size_t slen = strlen(s) + 1;
memmove(varname, s, slen);
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@LamentXU123 LamentXU123 May 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this the same thing to the original code, seems like this does not add a bounds check as you've described...?

}

for (p = varname; *p && *p != '['; p++) {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -596,6 +597,9 @@ static size_t multipart_buffer_read(multipart_buffer *self, char *buf, size_t by
}

/* maximum number of bytes we are reading */
if (bytes == 0) {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@LamentXU123 LamentXU123 May 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Likewise, the new bytes == 0 early return does not address the claimed remote memcpy()
overflow. The copy length is already constrained by len <= bytes - 1 (see line 603), and all in-tree callers pass a positive fixed buffer size (sizeof(buf) / sizeof(buff)) AFAIK. Or maybe I am missing something here

return 0;
}
len = max < bytes-1 ? max : bytes-1;

/* if we read any data... */
Expand Down
Loading