Re: xmalloc buffer overflow?

[Vasisht Tadigotla <vasisht () eden rutgers edu>]

can't reproduce it
# uname -a
Linux chpc01 2.2.17-14smp #1 SMP Mon Feb 5 18:40:03 EST 2001 i686 unknown
# vi `perl -e 'print "." x 90000000'`
bash: /bin/vi: Argument list too long
# vi -- version
VIM - Vi IMproved 5.4 (1999 Jul 25, compiled Jul 27 1999 18:09:29)

# uname -a Linux ch02 2.4.8-26mdkenterprise #1 SMP Sun Sep 23 16:36:00
CEST 2001 i686 unknown 
# vi `perl -e 'print "." x 90000000'` 
bash: /bin/vi: Argument list too long
# vi --version
VIM - Vi IMproved 6.0av BETA (2001 Sep 9, compiled Sep 10 2001 13:18:26)


vasisht

On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Robert Freeman wrote:

> Can anybody else verify these results? It doesn't matter what `perl -e
> 'print "." x 90000000'` is appended to, I just chose vi (the vi buffer
> overflow being my inspiration). Please use the exploit responsibly; also if
> it is redundant, I apologize.
>
>
> # uname -a
> Linux linux 2.4.4-4GB #1 Fri May 18 14:11:12 GMT 2001 i686 unknown  [I know
> about the clock...]
> # id
> uid=500(nobody) gid=100(users) groups=100(users)
> # vi `perl -e 'print "." x 90000000'`
> bash: xmalloc: cannot allocate 90000001 bytes (0 bytes allocated)
> # id
> uid=0(root) gid=0(root)
> groups=0(root),1(bin),14(uucp),15(shadow),16(dialout),17(audio),65534(nogrou
> p)
>
>
> Robert Freeman
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today
> Only $9.95 per month!
> http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty
recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the
dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open
eyes, to make it possible. - Seven Pillars of Wisdom