Valgrind identified the following use of uninitialized data:
==2782220== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==2782220== at 0x42B364: grub_hfsplus_btree_search (hfsplus.c:566)
==2782220== by 0x42B21D: grub_hfsplus_read_block (hfsplus.c:185)
==2782220== by 0x42A693: grub_fshelp_read_file (fshelp.c:386)
==2782220== by 0x42C598: grub_hfsplus_read_file (hfsplus.c:219)
==2782220== by 0x42C598: grub_hfsplus_mount (hfsplus.c:330)
==2782220== by 0x42B8C5: grub_hfsplus_dir (hfsplus.c:958)
==2782220== by 0x4C1AE6: grub_fs_probe (fs.c:73)
==2782220== by 0x407C94: grub_ls_list_files (ls.c:186)
==2782220== by 0x407C94: grub_cmd_ls (ls.c:284)
==2782220== by 0x4D7130: grub_extcmd_dispatcher (extcmd.c:55)
==2782220== by 0x4045A6: execute_command (grub-fstest.c:59)
==2782220== by 0x4045A6: fstest (grub-fstest.c:433)
==2782220== by 0x4045A6: main (grub-fstest.c:772)
==2782220== Uninitialised value was created by a heap allocation
==2782220== at 0x483C7F3: malloc (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2782220== by 0x4C0305: grub_malloc (mm.c:42)
==2782220== by 0x42C21D: grub_hfsplus_mount (hfsplus.c:239)
==2782220== by 0x42B8C5: grub_hfsplus_dir (hfsplus.c:958)
==2782220== by 0x4C1AE6: grub_fs_probe (fs.c:73)
==2782220== by 0x407C94: grub_ls_list_files (ls.c:186)
==2782220== by 0x407C94: grub_cmd_ls (ls.c:284)
==2782220== by 0x4D7130: grub_extcmd_dispatcher (extcmd.c:55)
==2782220== by 0x4045A6: execute_command (grub-fstest.c:59)
==2782220== by 0x4045A6: fstest (grub-fstest.c:433)
==2782220== by 0x4045A6: main (grub-fstest.c:772)
This happens when the process of reading the catalog file goes sufficiently
wrong that there's an attempt to read the extent overflow file, which has
not yet been loaded. Keep track of when the extent overflow file is
fully loaded and refuse to use it before then.
The load valgrind doesn't like is btree->nodesize, and that's then used
to allocate a data structure. It looks like there are subsequently a lot
of reads based on that pointer so OOB reads are likely, and indeed crashes
(albeit difficult-to-replicate ones) have been observed in fuzzing.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>
