Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 22, 2019. It is now read-only.

Bug in boundary checking in the CBORParser #13

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 19, 2015

Conversation

stevegury
Copy link
Contributor

When reading from an composite inputStream, there's a bug during the checking
of the buffer boundary. This may lead to an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.

I build a test case that expose the bug and fixed the bound checking.

When reading from an composite inputStream, there's a bug during the checking
of the buffer boundary. This may lead to an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.

I build a test case that expose the bug and fixed the bound checking.
@stevegury
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey @cowtowncoder, did you have the chance to look at this PR? (no rush)

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

Ah. Thank you for reminding! This did slip through, I did see original creation, but forgot to follow up.

cowtowncoder added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2015
Bug in boundary checking in the CBORParser
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder merged commit 4c371db into FasterXML:master Aug 19, 2015
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added this to the 2.6.2 milestone Aug 19, 2015
cowtowncoder added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2015
cowtowncoder added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2015
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

Big thank you for finding and fixing this problem. I verified and it is a regression from 2.5, related to symbol table changes and performance optimizations; so it does not affect pre-2.6 versions.
Fix will be in 2.6.2, which will take couple of weeks as I am leaving on vacation now, but should be released around mid-September at least, due to severity of this problem.

@stevegury
Copy link
Contributor Author

I can work with the snapshot version in the meantime.
Have a good vacation!

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants