Skip to content

Conversation

@wooffie
Copy link
Contributor

@wooffie wooffie commented May 19, 2025

Summary

In parsing dnstap we can deserialize address of bad length and after get panic. Added some checks...

Change Type

  • Bug fix
  • New feature
  • Non-functional (chore, refactoring, docs)
  • Performance

Is this a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • No

How did you test this PR?

Testcase which show that this problem can be accessed outside crate:

    #[test]
    fn test_parse_dnstap_data_with_bad_address() {
        let a = [
            40, 4, 114, 56, 56, 42, 42, 42, 42, 42, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 185, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
            96, 64, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 55, 55, 43, 55, 55, 54, 64,
            114, 42, 56, 0, 16, 2, 42, 0, 114, 4, 56, 56, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 56, 56, 2, 48, 0,
        ];
        let mut log_event = LogEvent::default();

        let _parse_result = DnstapParser::parse(
            &mut log_event,
            Bytes::copy_from_slice(&a),
            DnsParserOptions::default(),
        );
    }

And some trace:

thread 'parser::tests::test_parse_dnstap_data_with_bad_address' panicked at lib/dnstap-parser/src/parser.rs:470:64:
range end index 16 out of range for slice of length 0
stack backtrace:
   0: rust_begin_unwind
             at /rustc/4eb161250e340c8f48f66e2b929ef4a5bed7c181/library/std/src/panicking.rs:692:5
   1: core::panicking::panic_fmt
             at /rustc/4eb161250e340c8f48f66e2b929ef4a5bed7c181/library/core/src/panicking.rs:75:14
   2: core::slice::index::slice_end_index_len_fail::do_panic::runtime
             at /rustc/4eb161250e340c8f48f66e2b929ef4a5bed7c181/library/core/src/panic.rs:218:21
   3: core::slice::index::slice_end_index_len_fail::do_panic
             at /rustc/4eb161250e340c8f48f66e2b929ef4a5bed7c181/library/core/src/intrinsics/mod.rs:3869:9
   4: core::slice::index::slice_end_index_len_fail
             at /rustc/4eb161250e340c8f48f66e2b929ef4a5bed7c181/library/core/src/panic.rs:223:9
   5: <core::ops::range::Range<usize> as core::slice::index::SliceIndex<[T]>>::index
             at /home/wooffie/.rustup/toolchains/1.85-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/slice/index.rs:437:13
   6: core::slice::index::<impl core::ops::index::Index<I> for [T]>::index
             at /home/wooffie/.rustup/toolchains/1.85-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/slice/index.rs:16:9
   7: <alloc::vec::Vec<T,A> as core::ops::index::Index<I>>::index
             at /home/wooffie/.rustup/toolchains/1.85-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/alloc/src/vec/mod.rs:3361:9
   8: dnstap_parser::parser::DnstapParser::parse_dnstap_message_socket_family
             at ./src/parser.rs:470:64
   9: dnstap_parser::parser::DnstapParser::parse_dnstap_message
             at ./src/parser.rs:192:13
  10: dnstap_parser::parser::DnstapParser::parse
             at ./src/parser.rs:153:25
  11: dnstap_parser::parser::tests::test_parse_dnstap_data_with_bad_address
             at ./src/parser.rs:1377:25
  12: dnstap_parser::parser::tests::test_parse_dnstap_data_with_bad_address::{{closure}}
             at ./src/parser.rs:1369:49
  13: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
             at /home/wooffie/.rustup/toolchains/1.85-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5
  14: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
             at /rustc/4eb161250e340c8f48f66e2b929ef4a5bed7c181/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace.


failures:
    parser::tests::test_parse_dnstap_data_with_bad_address

I added some checks that can be return Err to be emited in main parsing function. Also testcases which cover all problems

You can add just my testcases and see panic

Does this PR include user facing changes?

I dont care, at the team discretion

  • Yes. Please add a changelog fragment based on our guidelines.
  • No. A maintainer will apply the "no-changelog" label to this PR.

Notes

  • Please read our Vector contributor resources.
  • Do not hesitate to use @vectordotdev/vector to reach out to us regarding this PR.
  • The CI checks run only after we manually approve them.
    • We recommend adding a pre-push hook, please see this template.
    • Alternatively, we recommend running the following locally before pushing to the remote branch:
      • cargo fmt --all
      • cargo clippy --workspace --all-targets -- -D warnings
      • cargo nextest run --workspace (alternatively, you can run cargo test --all)
      • ./scripts/check_changelog_fragments.sh
  • After a review is requested, please avoid force pushes to help us review incrementally.
    • Feel free to push as many commits as you want. They will be squashed into one before merging.
    • For example, you can run git merge origin master and git push.
  • If this PR introduces changes Vector dependencies (modifies Cargo.lock), please
    run cargo vdev build licenses to regenerate the license inventory and commit the changes (if any). More details here.

References

@wooffie wooffie requested a review from a team as a code owner May 19, 2025 12:33
@wooffie
Copy link
Contributor Author

wooffie commented May 19, 2025

Also, we can do it like this:

let buffer = query_address
                    .get(..4)
                    .ok_or_else(|| Error::from("Cannot parse query_address"))?;
let address_buffer: [u8; 4] = (*buffer).try_into()?;

Copy link
Member

@pront pront left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@pront pront enabled auto-merge May 19, 2025 12:55
@wooffie
Copy link
Contributor Author

wooffie commented May 19, 2025

I'll fix this, sorry

auto-merge was automatically disabled May 19, 2025 13:20

Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

@pront pront enabled auto-merge May 19, 2025 13:22
@pront pront added this pull request to the merge queue May 19, 2025
Merged via the queue into vectordotdev:master with commit e76f18e May 19, 2025
42 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants