fix: add value checking to @validateByteRange #3322
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
theseion
requested changes
Jan 6, 2025
|
theseion
approved these changes
Jan 6, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
what
This patch adds a value checking for operator
@validateByteRange. Normally this operator allows values between 0 and 255.The necessary check was already implemented but it was wrong place. The other problem was that in case of any error during the checks code never returned with
falsevalue - therefore the appended errors never seemed.Unfortunately I can't add any test cases to regression tests, because the test framework does not have any option to handle these kind of errors.
why
If the admin gives an extra high value (eg 999999) then the engine exists with a segfault. @Wiz_io team reported few issues in e-mail (modsecurity at owasp dot org), the first one was this.