Commit
With GCC and a certain combination of flags, Valgrind will falsely trigger an invalid write. This appears to be due to the omission of instructions to properly save, set up, and restore the frame pointer. The IFUNC resolver is a leaf function since it only calls a function that is inlined. So sometimes GCC omits the frame pointer instructions in the resolver unless this optimization is explictly disabled. This fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267598.
- Loading branch information
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -98,13 +98,12 @@ typedef uint64_t (*crc64_func_type)( | |
# pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function" | ||
#endif | ||
|
||
#ifdef CRC_USE_IFUNC | ||
__attribute__((__no_profile_instrument_function__)) | ||
#endif | ||
// The funcion attributes are needed for safe IFUNC resolver usage with GCC. | ||
lzma_resolver_attributes | ||
static crc64_func_type | ||
crc64_resolve(void) | ||
{ | ||
return is_arch_extension_supported() | ||
return is_arch_extension_supported() | ||
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sora1248
|
||
? &crc64_arch_optimized : &crc64_generic; | ||
} | ||
|
||
|
9 comments
on commit 82ecc53
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks like this commit fixes https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/29/4
Is it any plan to release ASAP new version because this commit? ๐ค
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK so my understanding is that in Phoronix article someone wrongly that 4.6.1 is affected? ๐ค
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Someone contact Brian Krebs about this at: https://krebsonsecurity.com/about/
Link him to the source article: https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/29/4
Otherwise the threat actor might slip though the net, but if he gains mainstream attention it's more likely he will face scrutiney by an alphabet organisation or two and we might find out who funded the threat actor or what his intentions where.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kloczek itโs a supply chain attack, meaning (at least) one of the projectโs major contributors added malicious code
So it has not been fixed, and likely wonโt be depending how high up that contributor is
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've red one more time CVE and my understanding is that compromised is not content of the git repo but github tag assets where are distributed dist tar balls).
Am I right? ๐ค
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kianmeng https://boehs.org/node/everything-i-know-about-the-xz-backdoor is one of the best summaries IMHO and worth a read.
whyy