[C++][Fuzzing] Fix bug discovered by fuzzing #45180
Assignees
Milestone
Comments
zeroshade
added a commit
to zeroshade/arrow
that referenced
this issue
Jan 6, 2025
pitrou
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2025
### Rationale for this change If the value for Decimal32 or Decimal64 is `INT32_MIN` or `INT64_MIN` respectively, then UBSAN reports an issue when calling Negate on them due to overflow. ### What changes are included in this PR? Have the `Negate` methods of Decimal32 and Decimal64 use `arrow::internal::SafeSignedNegate`. ### Are these changes tested? Unit tests were added for both cases which were able to reproduce the problem when UBSAN was on without the fix. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. * OSS-Fuzz issue: https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/371239168 * GitHub Issue: #45180 Authored-by: Matt Topol <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]>
|
Issue resolved by pull request 45181 |
|
@amoeba FYI I've added the 19.0.1 milestone as per |
amoeba
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 31, 2025
### Rationale for this change If the value for Decimal32 or Decimal64 is `INT32_MIN` or `INT64_MIN` respectively, then UBSAN reports an issue when calling Negate on them due to overflow. ### What changes are included in this PR? Have the `Negate` methods of Decimal32 and Decimal64 use `arrow::internal::SafeSignedNegate`. ### Are these changes tested? Unit tests were added for both cases which were able to reproduce the problem when UBSAN was on without the fix. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. * OSS-Fuzz issue: https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/371239168 * GitHub Issue: #45180 Authored-by: Matt Topol <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]>
amoeba
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 31, 2025
### Rationale for this change If the value for Decimal32 or Decimal64 is `INT32_MIN` or `INT64_MIN` respectively, then UBSAN reports an issue when calling Negate on them due to overflow. ### What changes are included in this PR? Have the `Negate` methods of Decimal32 and Decimal64 use `arrow::internal::SafeSignedNegate`. ### Are these changes tested? Unit tests were added for both cases which were able to reproduce the problem when UBSAN was on without the fix. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. * OSS-Fuzz issue: https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/371239168 * GitHub Issue: #45180 Authored-by: Matt Topol <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Describe the bug, including details regarding any error messages, version, and platform.
Decimal32 and Decimal64 negation methods allowed for overflows if the value was
INT32_MINorINT64_MINwhich were discovered by OSS-Fuzz. This is easily fixed by usingarrow::internal::SafeSignedNegate.Component(s)
C++, Continuous Integration
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: