Message325128
| Author | vstinner |
|---|
| Recipients | Jeffrey.Walton, alex, alexandre.vassalotti, deadshort, dmalcolm, donmez, fweimer, jcea, jwilk, loewis, mark.dickinson, martin.panter, matejcik, miss-islington, nnorwitz, pitrou, python-dev, serhiy.storchaka, sir-sigurd, vstinner, xiang.zhang, ztane |
|---|
| Date | 2018-09-12.07:52:57 |
|---|
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
|---|
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
|---|
| Message-id | <1536738777.18.0.956365154283.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
|---|
| In-reply-to | |
|---|
| Content |
|---|
I asked if there is an issue. In fact, all Python memory allocators start by checking if the size is larger than PY_SSIZE_T_MAX. Example:void *PyMem_RawMalloc(size_t size){ /* * Limit ourselves to PY_SSIZE_T_MAX bytes to prevent security holes. * Most python internals blindly use a signed Py_ssize_t to track * things without checking for overflows or negatives. * As size_t is unsigned, checking for size < 0 is not required. */ if (size > (size_t)PY_SSIZE_T_MAX) return NULL; return _PyMem_Raw.malloc(_PyMem_Raw.ctx, size);} |
| History |
|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
|---|
| 2018-09-12 07:52:57 | vstinner | set | recipients: +vstinner,loewis,nnorwitz,jcea,mark.dickinson,pitrou,alexandre.vassalotti,donmez,matejcik,jwilk,alex,dmalcolm,python-dev,deadshort,martin.panter,serhiy.storchaka,ztane,fweimer,Jeffrey.Walton,xiang.zhang,sir-sigurd,miss-islington | | 2018-09-12 07:52:57 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1536738777.18.0.956365154283.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> | | 2018-09-12 07:52:57 | vstinner | link | issue1621 messages | | 2018-09-12 07:52:57 | vstinner | create | |
|