Skip to content
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.

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

Jump to bottom

Project bignum-fuzzer is creating confusion for upstream developers #1761

Closed
inferno-chromium opened this issue Aug 26, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Project bignum-fuzzer is creating confusion for upstream developers #1761

inferno-chromium opened this issue Aug 26, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@inferno-chromium
Copy link
Collaborator

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=10063#c3

@kroeckx @guidovranken @kcc - lets try to discuss and resolve any confusion that this project creates. How can this comparison be improved ? What sort of testcase reduction are you looking for ?

Just fyi, that bug is not created as a security bug.
@kroeckx
Copy link
Contributor

kroeckx commented Aug 26, 2018

There is a bug, but it's only reproducible on certain cpu types. This result in it being found by oss-fuzz, and later closed by it while the bug didn't get fixed, because it tried to reproduce it on a different CPU type. This same bug has already been found and closed several times. The bug is still not fixed in OpenSSL.

@guidovranken
Copy link
Contributor

I can make a workaround in in the base project ( https://github.com/guidovranken/bignum-fuzzer ).
Either that or OpenSSL must fix the bug. I already reported the bug "like 10 times" so I'm not going to make another GitHub issue for it. Devs have all the info they need.

@guidovranken
Copy link
Contributor

Workaround implemented guidovranken/bignum-fuzzer@9ccc337
I expect that the outstanding bug(s) will be marked as resolved by the system in the next build.
Will remove the workaround once OpenSSL fixes the bug.

@guidovranken
Copy link
Contributor

As expected, the system has now marked the issue as resolved. This particular bug will not reoccur. Feel free to close this issue if this solution is satisfactory.

davidben added a commit to davidben/openssl that referenced this issue Sep 11, 2018
@davidben
Reduce inputs before the RSAZ code.
adbc189 
The RSAZ code requires the input be fully-reduced. To be consistent with the
other codepaths, move the BN_nnmod logic before the RSAZ check.

This fixes an oft-reported fuzzer bug.
google/oss-fuzz#1761
@davidben davidben mentioned this issue Sep 11, 2018
Closed
1 task
@davidben
Copy link
Contributor

Here, have a fix. It's pretty uninteresting. OpenSSL just got the order of two things wrong.
openssl/openssl#7187

levitte pushed a commit to openssl/openssl that referenced this issue Jan 16, 2019
@davidben @paulidale
Reduce inputs before the RSAZ code.
3afd537 
The RSAZ code requires the input be fully-reduced. To be consistent with the
other codepaths, move the BN_nnmod logic before the RSAZ check.

This fixes an oft-reported fuzzer bug.
google/oss-fuzz#1761

Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <paul.dale@oracle.com>
(Merged from #7187)
levitte pushed a commit to openssl/openssl that referenced this issue Jan 16, 2019
@davidben @paulidale
Reduce inputs before the RSAZ code.
781378d 
The RSAZ code requires the input be fully-reduced. To be consistent with the
other codepaths, move the BN_nnmod logic before the RSAZ check.

This fixes an oft-reported fuzzer bug.
google/oss-fuzz#1761

Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <paul.dale@oracle.com>
(Merged from #7187)

(cherry picked from commit 3afd537)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@davidben @kroeckx @guidovranken @inferno-chromium