libarchive: handle erroneous archives #9452
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some more codepaths were added to the fuzzer in #9003 However, these paths are only valid to call in the event `archive_read_open_memory` returns `ARCHIVE_OK` -- the fuzzer is currently blocked due to this and is why the coverage decreased between 17th Nov to 19th Nov (https://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/libarchive/reports/20221117/linux/src/libarchive/report.html vs https://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/libarchive/reports/20221119/linux/src/libarchive/report.html) Am looking to get the coverage back up as I'm writing some documentation about ossf/fuzz-introspector#580 (comment) Signed-off-by: David Korczynski <[email protected]>
|
Good catch, thanks! |
jvoisin
approved these changes
Jan 18, 2023
AdamKorcz
approved these changes
Jan 18, 2023
eamonnmcmanus
pushed a commit
to eamonnmcmanus/oss-fuzz
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2023
Some more codepaths were added to the fuzzer in google#9003 However, these paths are only valid to call in the event `archive_read_open_memory` returns `ARCHIVE_OK` -- the fuzzer is currently blocked due to this and is why the coverage decreased between 17th Nov to 19th Nov (https://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/libarchive/reports/20221117/linux/src/libarchive/report.html vs https://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/libarchive/reports/20221119/linux/src/libarchive/report.html) Am looking to get the coverage back up as I'm writing some documentation about ossf/fuzz-introspector#580 (comment) @jvoisin could you help review? Signed-off-by: David Korczynski <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: David Korczynski <[email protected]>
DavidKorczynski
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2024
This fixes a major harness issue in the `libarchive` fuzzer and resolves a fuzzing roadblock issue related to the build setup. All calls after `archive_read_add_passphrase` currently exit early because the decoder state is marked as invalid due to incorrect API usage. When combined with libarchive/libarchive#2229, this should improve coverage from ~15% to >45%. While the harness issue [regressed](#9452 (comment)) at some point, it seems like the CRC build flag issue was always present in oss-fuzz's libarchive setup. Thanks!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Some more codepaths were added to the fuzzer in
#9003 However, these paths are only valid to call in the event
archive_read_open_memoryreturnsARCHIVE_OK-- the fuzzer is currently blocked due to this and is why the coverage decreased between 17th Nov to 19th Nov (https://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/libarchive/reports/20221117/linux/src/libarchive/report.html vshttps://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/libarchive/reports/20221119/linux/src/libarchive/report.html)
Am looking to get the coverage back up as I'm writing some documentation about
ossf/fuzz-introspector#580 (comment)
@jvoisin could you help review?
Signed-off-by: David Korczynski [email protected]