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

Fix to backups failing after Fix to CVE-2022-37705 runtar.c #204

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 24, 2023

Conversation

prajwaltr93
Copy link
Contributor

@prajwaltr93 prajwaltr93 commented Feb 24, 2023

- amgtar send '-' as a valid value for argument to --file
client-src/runtar.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@prajwaltr93 prajwaltr93 changed the title Backups Failing after Fix to CVE-2022-37704 runtar.c Fix to backups failing after Fix to CVE-2022-37704 runtar.c Feb 24, 2023
@amandaTrusted amandaTrusted merged commit 448a8b6 into zmanda:3_5 Feb 24, 2023
@amandaTrusted amandaTrusted changed the title Fix to backups failing after Fix to CVE-2022-37704 runtar.c Fix to backups failing after Fix to CVE-2022-37705 runtar.c Feb 24, 2023
@@ -192,8 +192,9 @@ main(
g_str_has_prefix(argv[i],"--exclude-from") ||
g_str_has_prefix(argv[i],"--files-from")) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hello, would this work?

		if (strchr(argv[i], '=')) {
		    good_option++;
		} else {
		    /* Accept theses options with the following argument */
		    good_option += 2;
		}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi,

yeah, i agree that this is a more elegant solution, would have been nice if this was suggested before code got merged. maybe a PR in lines of enhancement to argument checking in runtar ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well there was not much time for review of the PR. I will send you a separate PR.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, Thanks for your inputs.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

PR #206 against master branch (which does not have this fix yet, as your PR is for the 3_5 branch).

I can submit a PR against 3_5 as well.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR, i don't think a separate PR would be necessary for 3_5 as we can pick the changes from master.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants