Or any off_t which isn't very big (like signed 64 bit integer
that most system have). A small off_t could overflow if the
file being decompressed had long enough run of zero bytes,
which would result in corrupt output.
Now memcpy() or GNU C packed structs for unaligned access instead
of type punning. See the comment in this commit for details.
Avoiding type punning with unaligned access is needed to
silence gcc -fsanitize=undefined.
New functions: unaliged_readXXne and unaligned_writeXXne where
XX is 16, 32, or 64.
I should have always known this but I didn't. Here is an example
as a reminder to myself:
int mycopy(void *dest, void *src, size_t n)
{
memcpy(dest, src, n);
return dest == NULL;
}
In the example, a compiler may assume that dest != NULL because
passing NULL to memcpy() would be undefined behavior. Testing
with GCC 8.2.1, mycopy(NULL, NULL, 0) returns 1 with -O0 and -O1.
With -O2 the return value is 0 because the compiler infers that
dest cannot be NULL because it was already used with memcpy()
and thus the test for NULL gets optimized out.
In liblzma, if a null-pointer was passed to memcpy(), there were
no checks for NULL *after* the memcpy() call, so I cautiously
suspect that it shouldn't have caused bad behavior in practice,
but it's hard to be sure, and the problematic cases had to be
fixed anyway.
Thanks to Jeffrey Walton.
Now the widths of the check names is used to adjust the width
of the Check column. This way there no longer is a need to restrict
the widths of the check names to be at most ten terminal-columns.
"xz -dcfv not_an_xz_file" crashed (all four options are
required to trigger it). It caused xz to call
lzma_get_progress(&strm, ...) when no coder was initialized
in strm. In this situation strm.internal is NULL which leads
to a crash in lzma_get_progress().
The bug was introduced when xz started using lzma_get_progress()
to get progress info for multi-threaded compression, so the
bug is present in versions 5.1.3alpha and higher.
Thanks to Filip Palian <Filip.Palian@pjwstk.edu.pl> for
the bug report.
FUZZING_BUILD_MODE_UNSAFE_FOR_PRODUCTION is #defined when liblzma
is being built for fuzz testing.
Most fuzzed inputs would normally get rejected because of incorrect
CRC32 and the actual header decoding code wouldn't get fuzzed.
Disabling CRC32 checks avoids this problem. The fuzzer program
must still use LZMA_IGNORE_CHECK flag to disable verification of
integrity checks of uncompressed data.
It ended up printing an uninitialized char-array when trying to
print the check names (column 7) on the "totals" line.
This also changes the column 12 (minimum xz version) to
50000002 (xz 5.0.0) instead of 0 when there are no valid
input files.
Thanks to kidmin for the bug report.
The 0 got treated specially in a buggy way and as a result
the function did nothing. The API doc said that 0 was supposed
to return LZMA_PROG_ERROR but it didn't.
Now 0 is treated as if 1 had been specified. This is done because
0 is already used to indicate an error from lzma_memlimit_get()
and lzma_memusage().
In addition, lzma_memlimit_set() no longer checks that the new
limit is at least LZMA_MEMUSAGE_BASE. It's counter-productive
for the Index decoder and was actually needed only by the
auto decoder. Auto decoder has now been modified to check for
LZMA_MEMUSAGE_BASE.
It returned LZMA_PROG_ERROR, which was done to avoid zero as
the limit (because it's a special value elsewhere), but using
LZMA_PROG_ERROR is simply inconvenient and can cause bugs.
The fix/workaround is to treat 0 as if it were 1 byte. It's
effectively the same thing. The only weird consequence is
that then lzma_memlimit_get() will return 1 even when 0 was
specified as the limit.
This fixes a very rare corner case in xz --list where a specific
memory usage limit and a multi-stream file could print the
error message "Internal error (bug)" instead of saying that
the memory usage limit is too low.
