Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
Thanks for the report, I've added it to the issues list at the Binwalk project
page (http://binwalk.googlecode.com).
I'd like to reproduce the bug - can you tell me exactly which firmware image
caused the seg fault? I tried against
http://dd-wrt.com/routerdb/de/download/D-Link/DIR-615/C1/dir615c1-firmware.bin/3
588 but could not reproduce the issue.
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 25 Nov 2011 at 4:31
Hi,
some more info:
I am using gcc (Debian 4.6.2-4) 4.6.2
The firmware extracted is
http://dd-wrt.com/routerdb/de/download/D-Link/DIR-615/D3/dir615d-ddwrt-webflash.
bin/3829 (think the D3 version is germany specific (?))
My kernel is x86_64 (Linux super 3.1.0-1-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Nov 14 08:02:25 UTC
2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux)
I attached the valgrind log and the log of the extract-ng.sh script.
Original comment by zeynel.b...@gmail.com
on 26 Nov 2011 at 1:09
Attachments:
By the way, just noticed that the binwalk log in fmk/logs/binwalk.log seems to
look fine ...
Original comment by zeynel.b...@gmail.com
on 26 Nov 2011 at 1:13
Thanks for the additional information. I tested the firmware image on Ubuntu
10.04 Linux ubuntu 2.6.32-33-generic #71-Ubuntu SMP Wed Jul 20 17:27:30 UTC
2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux) with gcc 4.4.3 (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5), but binwalk ran
without error.
I can easily apply the patch, it's simple enough, but I'd really like to
understand what is causing the NULL string. The code explicitly checks the
'type' string pointer for NULL, and does not call print if type is NULL, so I'm
not sure how a NULL string is getting passed to vfprintf in the first place.
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 26 Nov 2011 at 2:20
Maybe it's something specific with my gcc version. Also you can recognize this
maybe because the patch is rather stupid. The print function works with null
strings if only one %s is present in the format string, if there are others it
seems to fail. So splitting up the print into two fixes the crash problem for
me, but I do not understand why... also had the same thoughts as you as there
are explicit checks for null ...
Original comment by zeynel.b...@gmail.com
on 26 Nov 2011 at 4:49
I could be a gcc issue, not sure - definitely odd though. In any case, if
splitting the print statement into two print statements fixes the issue I'll do
that as it won't hurt anything else. I'll apply the changes back to the main
binwalk project as well. Thanks!
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 26 Nov 2011 at 5:12
Upgraded binwalk to v0.4.1 which fixes this issue.
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 3 Dec 2011 at 3:46
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
zeynel.b...@gmail.com
on 25 Nov 2011 at 10:06Attachments: