GH-48900: [C++] Avoid memory blowup with excessive variadic buffer count in IPC #48901
+13
−7
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pitrou
force-pushed
the
check_variadic_buffer_count
branch
from
e3d44d5 to
45e4584
Compare
Member
Author
|
@github-actions crossbow submit -g cpp |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
Member
Author
|
The failure on the ASAN CI job is because #48859 needs to be merged. |
pitrou
added
the
Critical Fix
WillAyd
approved these changes
Jan 20, 2026
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting committer review
pitrou
force-pushed
the
check_variadic_buffer_count
branch
from
45e4584 to
76d9280
Compare
Member
Author
|
@github-actions crossbow submit -g cpp |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
pitrou
force-pushed
the
check_variadic_buffer_count
branch
from
76d9280 to
a600573
Compare
Member
Author
|
@github-actions crossbow submit -g cpp |
Member
Author
|
Rebased, I'll merge if CI is green. Thanks for the review @WillAyd ! |
|
Revision: a600573 Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-23dc77869a
|
|
After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 3 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 421a475. There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉 The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 2 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them. |
raulcd
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2026
…unt in IPC (#48901) ### Rationale for this change An incorrect variadic buffer count could easily blow up memory when reserving a vector of Buffers, even though the RecordBatch has a lot less buffers available. Reported by OSS-Fuzz at https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/476180608, and separately by Silas Boch. ### What changes are included in this PR? Pre-validate the variadic buffer count read from the IPC RecordBatch table. Initial patch by Silas Boch. ### Are these changes tested? Yes, by additional fuzz regression file. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. **This PR contains a "Critical Fix".** (If the changes fix either (a) a security vulnerability, (b) a bug that caused incorrect or invalid data to be produced, or (c) a bug that causes a crash (even when the API contract is upheld), please provide explanation. If not, you can remove this.) * GitHub Issue: #48900 Authored-by: Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale for this change
An incorrect variadic buffer count could easily blow up memory when reserving a vector of Buffers, even though the RecordBatch has a lot less buffers available.
Reported by OSS-Fuzz at https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/476180608, and separately by Silas Boch.
What changes are included in this PR?
Pre-validate the variadic buffer count read from the IPC RecordBatch table. Initial patch by Silas Boch.
Are these changes tested?
Yes, by additional fuzz regression file.
Are there any user-facing changes?
No.
This PR contains a "Critical Fix". (If the changes fix either (a) a security vulnerability, (b) a bug that caused incorrect or invalid data to be produced, or (c) a bug that causes a crash (even when the API contract is upheld), please provide explanation. If not, you can remove this.)