[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[debbugs-tracker] bug#29666: closed (Segfault at changing location)

From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#29666: closed (Segfault at changing location)
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:45:02 +0000

Your message dated Sat, 16 Dec 2017 11:43:43 -0800
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#29666: Segfault at changing location
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #29666,
regarding Segfault at changing location
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact

29666: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=29666
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Segfault at changing location Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:44:25 +0100 User-agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
I am working on a project for school in which I use afl to find bugs in
software and I decided to fuzz grep. In doing so I discovered a
segfault. When using gdb, the location of the segfault varies, which
puzzles me and so I cannot include any further information.
The command to obtain this bug is:
grep -o -E -f <seg-file>
where <seg-file> is the file attached.

I am using grep 3.1 on arch linux.

Attachment: seg-file
Description: Binary data

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#29666: Segfault at changing location Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 11:43:43 -0800
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Jeremy Feusi <address@hidden> wrote:
> Thank you for the report.
> This has been an issue since about grep-2.6.1.
> It gave a proper diagnostic until 2.5.4:
>   $ grep-2.5.4/bin/grep -E -f <(printf %080000d 0|tr 0 '(')
>   grep-2.5.4/bin/grep: Unmatched ( or \(
>   [Exit 2]
> Starting in approximately 2.6.1 (I don't have 2.6.0 handy) it
> would fail like this:
>   $ grep-2.6.1/bin/grep -E -f <(printf %080000d 0|tr 0 '(')
>   Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> Using the latest with -P works fine:
>   $ grep -P -f <(printf %080000d 0|tr 0 '(')
>   grep: parentheses are too deeply nested
>   [Exit 2]
> Here's a nearly-complete patch to make grep diagnose the generic
> "stack overflow" problem:

I found the root cause and filed a glibc bug for that (link below).
Here are the updated commit log and NEWS entry:

    grep: diagnose stack overflow rather than segfaulting
    * bootstrap.conf (gnulib_modules): Add c-stack.
    * src/grep.c: Include "c-stack.h".
    (main): Call c_stack_action (NULL);
    * tests/stack-overflow: New file.
    * tests/Makefile.am (TESTS): Add name of new file.
    * NEWS (Improvements): Mention it.
    Interestingly, this bug does not afflict grep-2.5.4 or prior,
    so it appeared to have been introduced with grep-2.6.  However,
    the origin is in glibc's regexp compiler, and I tracked it to
    stack-aware parsing that was removed from glibc's regexp in 2002.
    However, grep-2.5.4 was released in 2009.  That version worked
    (and still works, now) because it included and (by default) used
    an old copy of glibc's regexp code.
    Jeremy Feusi reported the grep segfault in https://bugs.gnu.org/29666.
    I reported the glibc regexp bug in

** Improvements

  grep now diagnoses stack overflow.  Before grep-2.6, the included
  regexp code would detect it.  Since 2.6, grep defaulted to using
  glibc's regexp, which lost that capability.

Here's the pushed commit:

--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]