Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:10:31 -0700 From: Michal Zalewski <lcamtuf@...edump.cx> To: oss-security <oss-security@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: strings / libbfd crasher I do have a bunch more that seem exploitable, though - for example: http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/strings-bfd-badfree - does this repro for people (I tried with binutils 2.24)? I think that given the expectations people have around what strings does and whether it's safe to run on untrusted binaries, I'd seriously question the wisdom of making it use libbfd, at least by default; perhaps distros want to consider non-upstream patches that default to the -a mode, instead? I don't understand the user benefit of extracting strings only from certain sections of executables, and I almost feel like it's a side effect of strings being a part of binutils more than anything else. On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Hanno Böck <hanno@...eck.de> wrote: > I've now put this in upstream's bugtracker: > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17509 > > Hope noone else has already done this. > > -- > Hanno Böck > http://hboeck.de/ > > mail/jabber: hanno@...eck.de > GPG: BBB51E42
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.