What is the primary vulnerability in the following code?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Unsigned integer overflow occurs when a fixed-width unsigned type wraps around its maximum value, so len + 1 can become 0 for a 16-bit unsigned value. This is the core issue.

1. Relevant knowledge points and concepts
- uint16_t is a 16-bit unsigned integer with range 0..65535. Arithmetic on unsigned integers wraps modulo 2^n.
- malloc takes a size_t size; passing a small wrapped value causes underallocation.
- memcpy copies the specified number of bytes regardless of the destination allocation; copying more than allocated leads to buffer overflow.
- Writing a null terminator at buffer[len] assumes buffer has space for len+1 bytes.

2. Step-by-step reasoning
- The code computes: uint16_t total = len + 1; then calls malloc(total).
- If len == 65535 (UINT16_MAX), then len + 1 evaluates in uint16_t arithmetic to 0 (wrap-around).
- malloc(0) may return NULL or a pointer to no usable storage; in any case it does not provide len bytes of space.
- The code then does memcpy(buffer, input, len) and buffer[len] = '\0', which attempt to access len bytes and one more byte beyond the (non-)allocation.

3. Calculations / intermediate steps
- Example: len = 65535.
- total = len + 1 = 65535 + 1 = 65536 ≡ 0 (mod 2^16) → total == 0.
- malloc(total) becomes malloc(0) → zero bytes allocated.
- memcpy(buffer, input, 65535) copies 65535 bytes into a buffer with 0 bytes allocated → buffer overflow.
- buffer[65535] = '\0' writes out of bounds as well.

4. Why the correct answer is correct
- The root vulnerability is the integer overflow on len + 1 stored in uint16_t which causes underallocation and then out-of-bounds writes. That precisely matches "Adding 1 to len may cause an integer overflow, leading to under allocation."

5. Why other options are incorrect (brief)
- "malloc should always be followed by calloc": false and meaningless; calloc is not required.
- "null byte is added at wrong index": buffer[len] is correct when len+1 bytes are allocated.
- "malloc may allocate too much if len is zero": actually it allocates 1 byte (total = 1) so not an issue.
- "returns a void * means values lost and memory leak": returning void* is valid for a generic pointer; not a leak by itself.
- "memcpy before null-termination is undefined": memcpy is fine; writing the terminator after copying is normal.

6. Conclusion
The primary vulnerability is integer overflow when adding 1 to len (uint16_t), causing underallocation — matching the provided answer.

What is the primary vulnerability in the following code?单项选择题

类似问题

Which of the following is a potential issue when computing mid = (low + high) // 2 for very large lists?

When might you encounter a problem with integer overflow? 什么时候可能会遇到整数溢出问题？

An overflow error takes place when:

Consider the following code: long y = 9223372036854775807L; y = y + 1; System.out.println(y); What number does the program print when compiled and run? Hint: think about the max value you just looked up in your previous answer.

(Continuing the add Ada function from the previous question.) If we compile and run an Ada version of this function, on a platform with 32-bit Integers, passing it the values of a = 2147483647 and b = 10, the program results in a CONSTRAINT_ERROR being raised. Why does this error occur:

What can happen when a calculated value is too large to be represented by the available number of bits in a fixed-size data type?

What was the world's first widely adopted biodiversity policy?

The aim of the Paris Agreement is to ensure that the earth’s preindustrial temperature is not exceeded by more than º Celsius.

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单