Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Cc: Mats Kindahl <mats@timescale.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org

Date: 2024-02-06T20:57:38Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Use new overflow-safe integer comparison functions.
- 3b42bdb47169 17.0 landed
Introduce overflow-safe integer comparison functions.
- 6b80394781c8 17.0 landed
Replace calls to pg_qsort() with the qsort() macro.
- 5497daf3aa2a 17.0 landed
Switch over to using our own qsort() all the time, as has been proposed
- 6edd2b4a91bd 8.2.0 cited

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 03:55:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> A comparison routine that is not is probably broken, agreed.
> I didn't look through the details of the patch --- I was more
> curious whether we had a version of the qsort bug, because
> if we do, we should fix that too.

+1

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com