Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic)
From: Simon Roberts <thorpflyer () yahoo com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:43:06 -0800 (PST)
Seems to me that such ranges are application specific and therefore your problem, not the JVMs. You're describing a bug in your code, due to failure to validate, not a bug in the JVM which behaves exactly (and quite possibly provably) according to its specification. --- Andrew van der Stock <vanderaj () greebo net> wrote:
I'm not talking arbitrary code execution, I'm talking about odd code paths, bizarre outcomes, and DoS. For example (found via 19 Sins, Viega, Howard and LeBlanc): http://seclists.org/lists/bugtraq/2004/Nov/0097.html I know Michael reads webappsec, he may have more examples. In my own code testing, I look for silly behaviors if a user can insert a large or negative number. You'd be surprised how often it occurs. There is no excuse not to include basic range checks when performing data validation. thanks, Andrew On 29/03/2006, at 2:30 PM, michaelslists () gmail com wrote:No you dont. Arrays are all bounds checked; ..., that is, the following codewillthrow an exception: ================================ class Foo { static { int[] m = new int[2]; System.out.println(m[34]); } } ================================ What do you mean by "overflow"? Do you mean this? ================================ class Foo { static { int m = Integer.MAX_VALUE; int k = Integer.MAX_VALUE + Integer.MAX_VALUE; System.out.println(m); System.out.println(k); System.exit(0); } } ================================ if so, I don't see how that is an issue. -- Michael On 3/29/06, Andrew van der Stock <vanderaj () greebo net> wrote:This is not quite true. Java does not prevent integer overflows (it will not throw an exception). So you still have to be careful about array indexes. Andrew_______________________________________________Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code, (continued)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code Brian Eaton (Mar 27)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code Pavel Kankovsky (Mar 28)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code michaelslists (Mar 28)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code Andrew van der Stock (Mar 28)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code michaelslists (Mar 28)
- Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) Andrew van der Stock (Mar 28)
- Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) michaelslists (Mar 28)
- Re: Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) Eliah Kagan (Mar 28)
- Re: Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) michaelslists (Mar 28)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code Brian Eaton (Mar 27)
- Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) Eoin (Mar 29)
- Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) Simon Roberts (Mar 29)
- RE: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) Tim Hollebeek (Mar 29)
- Re: Java integer overflows (was: a really long topic) KF (lists) (Mar 29)
- Re: 4 Questions: Latest IE vulnerability, Firefox vs IE security, User vs Admin risk profile, and browsers coded in 100% Managed Verifiable code Brian Eaton (Mar 29)