[1/4] Add tests for fortification of bcopy and bzero.
Commit Message
This was formerly bundled with the tests for fortification of
explicit_bzero, but is unconnected and I'd like to go ahead and land
it ASAP.
zw
* debug/tst-chk1.c: Add tests for fortification of bcopy and bzero.
---
debug/tst-chk1.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
Comments
LGTM.
On 17/08/2016 14:19, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> This was formerly bundled with the tests for fortification of
> explicit_bzero, but is unconnected and I'd like to go ahead and land
> it ASAP.
>
> zw
>
> * debug/tst-chk1.c: Add tests for fortification of bcopy and bzero.
> ---
> debug/tst-chk1.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/debug/tst-chk1.c b/debug/tst-chk1.c
> index 4f968ee..478c2fb 100644
> --- a/debug/tst-chk1.c
> +++ b/debug/tst-chk1.c
> @@ -143,6 +143,11 @@ do_test (void)
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + memcpy (buf, "abcdefghij", 10);
> + bcopy (buf, buf + 1, 9);
> + if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
> + FAIL ();
> +
> if (mempcpy (buf + 5, "abcde", 5) != buf + 10
> || memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcde", 10))
> FAIL ();
> @@ -151,6 +156,10 @@ do_test (void)
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcjj", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + bzero (buf + 8, 2);
> + if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabc\0\0", 10))
> + FAIL ();
> +
> strcpy (buf + 4, "EDCBA");
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcEDCBA", 10))
> FAIL ();
> @@ -175,6 +184,11 @@ do_test (void)
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + memcpy (buf, "abcdefghij", l0 + 10);
> + bcopy (buf, buf + 1, l0 + 9);
> + if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
> + FAIL ();
> +
> if (mempcpy (buf + 5, "abcde", l0 + 5) != buf + 10
> || memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcde", 10))
> FAIL ();
> @@ -183,6 +197,10 @@ do_test (void)
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcjj", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + bzero (buf + 8, l0 + 2);
> + if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabc\0\0", 10))
> + FAIL ();
> +
> strcpy (buf + 4, str1 + 5);
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcEDCBA", 10))
> FAIL ();
> @@ -214,11 +232,18 @@ do_test (void)
> if (memcmp (buf, "aabcEcdZY", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + /* The following tests are supposed to succeed at all fortify
> + levels, even though they overflow a.buf1 into a.buf2. */
> memcpy (a.buf1, "abcdefghij", l0 + 10);
> memmove (a.buf1 + 1, a.buf1, l0 + 9);
> if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdefghi", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + memcpy (a.buf1, "abcdefghij", l0 + 10);
> + bcopy (a.buf1, a.buf1 + 1, l0 + 9);
> + if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdefghi", 10))
> + FAIL ();
> +
> if (mempcpy (a.buf1 + 5, "abcde", l0 + 5) != a.buf1 + 10
> || memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdabcde", 10))
> FAIL ();
> @@ -227,6 +252,10 @@ do_test (void)
> if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdabcjj", 10))
> FAIL ();
>
> + bzero (a.buf1 + 8, l0 + 2);
> + if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdabc\0\0", 10))
> + FAIL ();
> +
> #if __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL < 2
> /* The following tests are supposed to crash with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
> and sufficient GCC support, as the string operations overflow
> @@ -284,6 +313,14 @@ do_test (void)
> memmove (buf + 2, buf + 1, l0 + 9);
> CHK_FAIL_END
>
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bcopy (buf + 1, buf + 2, 9);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bcopy (buf + 1, buf + 2, l0 + 9);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> CHK_FAIL_START
> p = (char *) mempcpy (buf + 6, "abcde", 5);
> CHK_FAIL_END
> @@ -300,6 +337,14 @@ do_test (void)
> memset (buf + 9, 'j', l0 + 2);
> CHK_FAIL_END
>
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bzero (buf + 9, 2);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bzero (buf + 9, l0 + 2);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> CHK_FAIL_START
> strcpy (buf + 5, str1 + 5);
> CHK_FAIL_END
> @@ -377,6 +422,14 @@ do_test (void)
> memmove (a.buf1 + 2, a.buf1 + 1, l0 + 9);
> CHK_FAIL_END
>
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bcopy (a.buf1 + 1, a.buf1 + 2, 9);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bcopy (a.buf1 + 1, a.buf1 + 2, l0 + 9);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> CHK_FAIL_START
> p = (char *) mempcpy (a.buf1 + 6, "abcde", 5);
> CHK_FAIL_END
> @@ -393,6 +446,14 @@ do_test (void)
> memset (a.buf1 + 9, 'j', l0 + 2);
> CHK_FAIL_END
>
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bzero (a.buf1 + 9, 2);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> + CHK_FAIL_START
> + bzero (a.buf1 + 9, l0 + 2);
> + CHK_FAIL_END
> +
> # if __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL >= 2
> # define O 0
> # else
>
On 08/19/2016 08:49 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> On 17/08/2016 14:19, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> This was formerly bundled with the tests for fortification of
>> explicit_bzero, but is unconnected and I'd like to go ahead and land
>> it ASAP.
>
> LGTM.
Committed.
zw
@@ -143,6 +143,11 @@ do_test (void)
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
FAIL ();
+ memcpy (buf, "abcdefghij", 10);
+ bcopy (buf, buf + 1, 9);
+ if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
+ FAIL ();
+
if (mempcpy (buf + 5, "abcde", 5) != buf + 10
|| memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcde", 10))
FAIL ();
@@ -151,6 +156,10 @@ do_test (void)
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcjj", 10))
FAIL ();
+ bzero (buf + 8, 2);
+ if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabc\0\0", 10))
+ FAIL ();
+
strcpy (buf + 4, "EDCBA");
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcEDCBA", 10))
FAIL ();
@@ -175,6 +184,11 @@ do_test (void)
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
FAIL ();
+ memcpy (buf, "abcdefghij", l0 + 10);
+ bcopy (buf, buf + 1, l0 + 9);
+ if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdefghi", 10))
+ FAIL ();
+
if (mempcpy (buf + 5, "abcde", l0 + 5) != buf + 10
|| memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcde", 10))
FAIL ();
@@ -183,6 +197,10 @@ do_test (void)
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabcjj", 10))
FAIL ();
+ bzero (buf + 8, l0 + 2);
+ if (memcmp (buf, "aabcdabc\0\0", 10))
+ FAIL ();
+
strcpy (buf + 4, str1 + 5);
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcEDCBA", 10))
FAIL ();
@@ -214,11 +232,18 @@ do_test (void)
if (memcmp (buf, "aabcEcdZY", 10))
FAIL ();
+ /* The following tests are supposed to succeed at all fortify
+ levels, even though they overflow a.buf1 into a.buf2. */
memcpy (a.buf1, "abcdefghij", l0 + 10);
memmove (a.buf1 + 1, a.buf1, l0 + 9);
if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdefghi", 10))
FAIL ();
+ memcpy (a.buf1, "abcdefghij", l0 + 10);
+ bcopy (a.buf1, a.buf1 + 1, l0 + 9);
+ if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdefghi", 10))
+ FAIL ();
+
if (mempcpy (a.buf1 + 5, "abcde", l0 + 5) != a.buf1 + 10
|| memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdabcde", 10))
FAIL ();
@@ -227,6 +252,10 @@ do_test (void)
if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdabcjj", 10))
FAIL ();
+ bzero (a.buf1 + 8, l0 + 2);
+ if (memcmp (a.buf1, "aabcdabc\0\0", 10))
+ FAIL ();
+
#if __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL < 2
/* The following tests are supposed to crash with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
and sufficient GCC support, as the string operations overflow
@@ -284,6 +313,14 @@ do_test (void)
memmove (buf + 2, buf + 1, l0 + 9);
CHK_FAIL_END
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bcopy (buf + 1, buf + 2, 9);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bcopy (buf + 1, buf + 2, l0 + 9);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
CHK_FAIL_START
p = (char *) mempcpy (buf + 6, "abcde", 5);
CHK_FAIL_END
@@ -300,6 +337,14 @@ do_test (void)
memset (buf + 9, 'j', l0 + 2);
CHK_FAIL_END
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bzero (buf + 9, 2);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bzero (buf + 9, l0 + 2);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
CHK_FAIL_START
strcpy (buf + 5, str1 + 5);
CHK_FAIL_END
@@ -377,6 +422,14 @@ do_test (void)
memmove (a.buf1 + 2, a.buf1 + 1, l0 + 9);
CHK_FAIL_END
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bcopy (a.buf1 + 1, a.buf1 + 2, 9);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bcopy (a.buf1 + 1, a.buf1 + 2, l0 + 9);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
CHK_FAIL_START
p = (char *) mempcpy (a.buf1 + 6, "abcde", 5);
CHK_FAIL_END
@@ -393,6 +446,14 @@ do_test (void)
memset (a.buf1 + 9, 'j', l0 + 2);
CHK_FAIL_END
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bzero (a.buf1 + 9, 2);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
+ CHK_FAIL_START
+ bzero (a.buf1 + 9, l0 + 2);
+ CHK_FAIL_END
+
# if __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL >= 2
# define O 0
# else