diff options
author | Nat Goodspeed <nat@lindenlab.com> | 2023-01-04 17:18:31 -0500 |
---|---|---|
committer | Nat Goodspeed <nat@lindenlab.com> | 2023-01-04 17:18:31 -0500 |
commit | 99c040ea9976e90caec9dedd942badc1c43822e7 (patch) | |
tree | bdf19da22da0dcf050656af97132fe0b789f35d6 /indra/newview/llviewermessage.cpp | |
parent | 4093d5b1ebe6b0eb50473d5161042ac3a1b7f6b2 (diff) |
DRTVWR-575: Fix possible bad indexing in LLSD::operator[](size_t).
One could argue that passing a negative index to an LLSD array should do
something other than shrug and reference element [0], but as that's legacy
behavior, it seems all too likely that the viewer sometimes relies on it.
This specific problem arises if the index passed to operator[]() is negative
-- either with the previous Integer parameter or with size_t (which of course
reinterprets the negative index as hugely positive). The non-const
ImplArray::ref() overload checks parameter 'i' and, if it appears negative,
sets internal 'index' to 0.
But in the next stanza, if (index >= existing size()), it calls resize() to
scale the internal array up to one more than the requested index. The trouble
is that it passed resize(i + 1), not the adjusted resize(index + 1).
With a requested index of exactly -1, that would pass resize(0), which would
result in the ensuing array[0] reference being invalid.
With a requested index less than -1, that would pass resize(hugely positive)
-- since, whether operator[]() accepts signed LLSD::Integer or size_t,
resize() accepts std::vector::size_type. Given that the footprint of an LLSD
array element is at least a pointer, the number of bytes required for
resize(hugely positive) is likely to exceed available heap storage.
Passing the adjusted resize(index + 1) should defend against that case.
Diffstat (limited to 'indra/newview/llviewermessage.cpp')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions