Skip to content

Commit 63f6cf4

Browse files
feodorfeodor
committed
Merge branch 'master' into anyelement
2 parents c442953 + f6a54fe commit 63f6cf4

File tree

43 files changed

+481
-389
lines changed

Some content is hidden

Large Commits have some content hidden by default. Use the searchbox below for content that may be hidden.

43 files changed

+481
-389
lines changed

‎contrib/pg_stat_statements/pg_stat_statements.c

Lines changed: 1 addition & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -2645,8 +2645,7 @@ JumbleExpr(pgssJumbleState *jstate, Node *node)
26452645
InferenceElem *ie = (InferenceElem *) node;
26462646

26472647
APP_JUMB(ie->infercollid);
2648-
APP_JUMB(ie->inferopfamily);
2649-
APP_JUMB(ie->inferopcinputtype);
2648+
APP_JUMB(ie->inferopclass);
26502649
JumbleExpr(jstate, ie->expr);
26512650
}
26522651
break;

‎doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml

Lines changed: 3 additions & 3 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -5648,7 +5648,7 @@
56485648

56495649
<row>
56505650
<entry><structfield>provider</structfield></entry>
5651-
<entry><type>name</type></entry>
5651+
<entry><type>text</type></entry>
56525652
<entry></entry>
56535653
<entry>The label provider associated with this label.</entry>
56545654
</row>
@@ -5937,7 +5937,7 @@
59375937
</row>
59385938
<row>
59395939
<entry><structfield>provider</structfield></entry>
5940-
<entry><type>name</type></entry>
5940+
<entry><type>text</type></entry>
59415941
<entry></entry>
59425942
<entry>The label provider associated with this label.</entry>
59435943
</row>
@@ -9025,7 +9025,7 @@ SELECT * FROM pg_locks pl LEFT JOIN pg_prepared_xacts ppx
90259025
</row>
90269026
<row>
90279027
<entry><structfield>provider</structfield></entry>
9028-
<entry><type>name</type></entry>
9028+
<entry><type>text</type></entry>
90299029
<entry><literal><link linkend="catalog-pg-seclabel"><structname>pg_seclabel</structname></link>.provider</literal></entry>
90309030
<entry>The label provider associated with this label.</entry>
90319031
</row>

‎doc/src/sgml/release-9.0.sgml

Lines changed: 16 additions & 10 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
66

77
<note>
88
<title>Release Date</title>
9-
<simpara>2015-05-21</simpara>
9+
<simpara>2015-05-22</simpara>
1010
</note>
1111

1212
<para>
@@ -58,18 +58,24 @@
5858

5959
<listitem>
6060
<para>
61-
Consistently check for failure of the <function>*printf()</> family of
62-
functions (Noah Misch)
61+
Improve detection of system-call failures (Noah Misch)
6362
</para>
6463

6564
<para>
66-
Most calls of these functions did not consider the possibility that
67-
the functions could fail with, eg, out-of-memory conditions. The usual
68-
result would just be missing output, but crashes or exposure of
69-
unintended information are also possible. To protect against such
70-
risks uniformly, create wrappers around these functions that throw an
71-
error on failure. Also add missing error checks to a few
72-
security-relevant calls of other system functions.
65+
Our replacement implementation of <function>snprintf()</> failed to
66+
check for errors reported by the underlying system library calls;
67+
the main case that might be missed is out-of-memory situations.
68+
In the worst case this might lead to information exposure, due to our
69+
code assuming that a buffer had been overwritten when it hadn't been.
70+
Also, there were a few places in which security-relevant calls of other
71+
system library functions did not check for failure.
72+
</para>
73+
74+
<para>
75+
It remains possible that some calls of the <function>*printf()</>
76+
family of functions are vulnerable to information disclosure if an
77+
out-of-memory error occurs at just the wrong time. We judge the risk
78+
to not be large, but will continue analysis in this area.
7379
(CVE-2015-3166)
7480
</para>
7581
</listitem>

‎doc/src/sgml/release-9.1.sgml

Lines changed: 16 additions & 10 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
66

77
<note>
88
<title>Release Date</title>
9-
<simpara>2015-05-21</simpara>
9+
<simpara>2015-05-22</simpara>
1010
</note>
1111

1212
<para>
@@ -58,18 +58,24 @@
5858

5959
<listitem>
6060
<para>
61-
Consistently check for failure of the <function>*printf()</> family of
62-
functions (Noah Misch)
61+
Improve detection of system-call failures (Noah Misch)
6362
</para>
6463

6564
<para>
66-
Most calls of these functions did not consider the possibility that
67-
the functions could fail with, eg, out-of-memory conditions. The usual
68-
result would just be missing output, but crashes or exposure of
69-
unintended information are also possible. To protect against such
70-
risks uniformly, create wrappers around these functions that throw an
71-
error on failure. Also add missing error checks to a few
72-
security-relevant calls of other system functions.
65+
Our replacement implementation of <function>snprintf()</> failed to
66+
check for errors reported by the underlying system library calls;
67+
the main case that might be missed is out-of-memory situations.
68+
In the worst case this might lead to information exposure, due to our
69+
code assuming that a buffer had been overwritten when it hadn't been.
70+
Also, there were a few places in which security-relevant calls of other
71+
system library functions did not check for failure.
72+
</para>
73+
74+
<para>
75+
It remains possible that some calls of the <function>*printf()</>
76+
family of functions are vulnerable to information disclosure if an
77+
out-of-memory error occurs at just the wrong time. We judge the risk
78+
to not be large, but will continue analysis in this area.
7379
(CVE-2015-3166)
7480
</para>
7581
</listitem>

‎doc/src/sgml/release-9.2.sgml

Lines changed: 16 additions & 10 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
66

77
<note>
88
<title>Release Date</title>
9-
<simpara>2015-05-21</simpara>
9+
<simpara>2015-05-22</simpara>
1010
</note>
1111

1212
<para>
@@ -58,18 +58,24 @@
5858

5959
<listitem>
6060
<para>
61-
Consistently check for failure of the <function>*printf()</> family of
62-
functions (Noah Misch)
61+
Improve detection of system-call failures (Noah Misch)
6362
</para>
6463

6564
<para>
66-
Most calls of these functions did not consider the possibility that
67-
the functions could fail with, eg, out-of-memory conditions. The usual
68-
result would just be missing output, but crashes or exposure of
69-
unintended information are also possible. To protect against such
70-
risks uniformly, create wrappers around these functions that throw an
71-
error on failure. Also add missing error checks to a few
72-
security-relevant calls of other system functions.
65+
Our replacement implementation of <function>snprintf()</> failed to
66+
check for errors reported by the underlying system library calls;
67+
the main case that might be missed is out-of-memory situations.
68+
In the worst case this might lead to information exposure, due to our
69+
code assuming that a buffer had been overwritten when it hadn't been.
70+
Also, there were a few places in which security-relevant calls of other
71+
system library functions did not check for failure.
72+
</para>
73+
74+
<para>
75+
It remains possible that some calls of the <function>*printf()</>
76+
family of functions are vulnerable to information disclosure if an
77+
out-of-memory error occurs at just the wrong time. We judge the risk
78+
to not be large, but will continue analysis in this area.
7379
(CVE-2015-3166)
7480
</para>
7581
</listitem>

‎doc/src/sgml/release-9.3.sgml

Lines changed: 16 additions & 10 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
66

77
<note>
88
<title>Release Date</title>
9-
<simpara>2015-05-21</simpara>
9+
<simpara>2015-05-22</simpara>
1010
</note>
1111

1212
<para>
@@ -58,18 +58,24 @@
5858

5959
<listitem>
6060
<para>
61-
Consistently check for failure of the <function>*printf()</> family of
62-
functions (Noah Misch)
61+
Improve detection of system-call failures (Noah Misch)
6362
</para>
6463

6564
<para>
66-
Most calls of these functions did not consider the possibility that
67-
the functions could fail with, eg, out-of-memory conditions. The usual
68-
result would just be missing output, but crashes or exposure of
69-
unintended information are also possible. To protect against such
70-
risks uniformly, create wrappers around these functions that throw an
71-
error on failure. Also add missing error checks to a few
72-
security-relevant calls of other system functions.
65+
Our replacement implementation of <function>snprintf()</> failed to
66+
check for errors reported by the underlying system library calls;
67+
the main case that might be missed is out-of-memory situations.
68+
In the worst case this might lead to information exposure, due to our
69+
code assuming that a buffer had been overwritten when it hadn't been.
70+
Also, there were a few places in which security-relevant calls of other
71+
system library functions did not check for failure.
72+
</para>
73+
74+
<para>
75+
It remains possible that some calls of the <function>*printf()</>
76+
family of functions are vulnerable to information disclosure if an
77+
out-of-memory error occurs at just the wrong time. We judge the risk
78+
to not be large, but will continue analysis in this area.
7379
(CVE-2015-3166)
7480
</para>
7581
</listitem>

‎doc/src/sgml/release-9.4.sgml

Lines changed: 23 additions & 10 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
66

77
<note>
88
<title>Release Date</title>
9-
<simpara>2015-05-21</simpara>
9+
<simpara>2015-05-22</simpara>
1010
</note>
1111

1212
<para>
@@ -87,22 +87,35 @@ Branch: REL9_3_STABLE [c669915fd] 2015-05-18 10:02:37 -0400
8787
Branch: REL9_2_STABLE [01272d95a] 2015-05-18 10:02:37 -0400
8888
Branch: REL9_1_STABLE [2cb9f2cab] 2015-05-18 10:02:38 -0400
8989
Branch: REL9_0_STABLE [9b5e831e3] 2015-05-18 10:02:38 -0400
90+
Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
91+
Branch: master [0c071936e] 2015-05-19 18:19:38 -0400
92+
Branch: REL9_4_STABLE [2eb2fcd56] 2015-05-19 18:16:19 -0400
93+
Branch: REL9_3_STABLE [13341276e] 2015-05-19 18:16:58 -0400
94+
Branch: REL9_2_STABLE [221f7a949] 2015-05-19 18:17:42 -0400
95+
Branch: REL9_1_STABLE [0510cff6e] 2015-05-19 18:18:16 -0400
96+
Branch: REL9_0_STABLE [cf893530a] 2015-05-19 18:18:56 -0400
9097
-->
9198

9299
<listitem>
93100
<para>
94-
Consistently check for failure of the <function>*printf()</> family of
95-
functions (Noah Misch)
101+
Improve detection of system-call failures (Noah Misch)
102+
</para>
103+
104+
<para>
105+
Our replacement implementation of <function>snprintf()</> failed to
106+
check for errors reported by the underlying system library calls;
107+
the main case that might be missed is out-of-memory situations.
108+
In the worst case this might lead to information exposure, due to our
109+
code assuming that a buffer had been overwritten when it hadn't been.
110+
Also, there were a few places in which security-relevant calls of other
111+
system library functions did not check for failure.
96112
</para>
97113

98114
<para>
99-
Most calls of these functions did not consider the possibility that
100-
the functions could fail with, eg, out-of-memory conditions. The usual
101-
result would just be missing output, but crashes or exposure of
102-
unintended information are also possible. To protect against such
103-
risks uniformly, create wrappers around these functions that throw an
104-
error on failure. Also add missing error checks to a few
105-
security-relevant calls of other system functions.
115+
It remains possible that some calls of the <function>*printf()</>
116+
family of functions are vulnerable to information disclosure if an
117+
out-of-memory error occurs at just the wrong time. We judge the risk
118+
to not be large, but will continue analysis in this area.
106119
(CVE-2015-3166)
107120
</para>
108121
</listitem>

‎src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c

Lines changed: 1 addition & 1 deletion
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -2651,7 +2651,7 @@ XLogFlush(XLogRecPtr record)
26512651

26522652
/*
26532653
* Re-check how far we can now flush the WAL. It's generally not
2654-
* safe to call WaitXLogInsetionsToFinish while holding
2654+
* safe to call WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish while holding
26552655
* WALWriteLock, because an in-progress insertion might need to
26562656
* also grab WALWriteLock to make progress. But we know that all
26572657
* the insertions up to insertpos have already finished, because

‎src/backend/commands/seclabel.c

Lines changed: 10 additions & 14 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -163,8 +163,8 @@ GetSharedSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object, const char *provider)
163163
ObjectIdGetDatum(object->classId));
164164
ScanKeyInit(&keys[2],
165165
Anum_pg_shseclabel_provider,
166-
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_NAMEEQ,
167-
CStringGetDatum(provider));
166+
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_TEXTEQ,
167+
CStringGetTextDatum(provider));
168168

169169
pg_shseclabel = heap_open(SharedSecLabelRelationId, AccessShareLock);
170170

@@ -220,8 +220,8 @@ GetSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object, const char *provider)
220220
Int32GetDatum(object->objectSubId));
221221
ScanKeyInit(&keys[3],
222222
Anum_pg_seclabel_provider,
223-
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_NAMEEQ,
224-
CStringGetDatum(provider));
223+
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_TEXTEQ,
224+
CStringGetTextDatum(provider));
225225

226226
pg_seclabel = heap_open(SecLabelRelationId, AccessShareLock);
227227

@@ -256,7 +256,6 @@ SetSharedSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object,
256256
SysScanDesc scan;
257257
HeapTuple oldtup;
258258
HeapTuple newtup = NULL;
259-
NameData providername;
260259
Datum values[Natts_pg_shseclabel];
261260
bool nulls[Natts_pg_shseclabel];
262261
bool replaces[Natts_pg_shseclabel];
@@ -266,8 +265,7 @@ SetSharedSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object,
266265
memset(replaces, false, sizeof(replaces));
267266
values[Anum_pg_shseclabel_objoid - 1] = ObjectIdGetDatum(object->objectId);
268267
values[Anum_pg_shseclabel_classoid - 1] = ObjectIdGetDatum(object->classId);
269-
namestrcpy(&providername, provider);
270-
values[Anum_pg_shseclabel_provider - 1] = NameGetDatum(&providername);
268+
values[Anum_pg_shseclabel_provider - 1] = CStringGetTextDatum(provider);
271269
if (label != NULL)
272270
values[Anum_pg_shseclabel_label - 1] = CStringGetTextDatum(label);
273271

@@ -282,8 +280,8 @@ SetSharedSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object,
282280
ObjectIdGetDatum(object->classId));
283281
ScanKeyInit(&keys[2],
284282
Anum_pg_shseclabel_provider,
285-
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_NAMEEQ,
286-
CStringGetDatum(provider));
283+
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_TEXTEQ,
284+
CStringGetTextDatum(provider));
287285

288286
pg_shseclabel = heap_open(SharedSecLabelRelationId, RowExclusiveLock);
289287

@@ -337,7 +335,6 @@ SetSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object,
337335
SysScanDesc scan;
338336
HeapTuple oldtup;
339337
HeapTuple newtup = NULL;
340-
NameData providername;
341338
Datum values[Natts_pg_seclabel];
342339
bool nulls[Natts_pg_seclabel];
343340
bool replaces[Natts_pg_seclabel];
@@ -355,8 +352,7 @@ SetSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object,
355352
values[Anum_pg_seclabel_objoid - 1] = ObjectIdGetDatum(object->objectId);
356353
values[Anum_pg_seclabel_classoid - 1] = ObjectIdGetDatum(object->classId);
357354
values[Anum_pg_seclabel_objsubid - 1] = Int32GetDatum(object->objectSubId);
358-
namestrcpy(&providername, provider);
359-
values[Anum_pg_seclabel_provider - 1] = NameGetDatum(&providername);
355+
values[Anum_pg_seclabel_provider - 1] = CStringGetTextDatum(provider);
360356
if (label != NULL)
361357
values[Anum_pg_seclabel_label - 1] = CStringGetTextDatum(label);
362358

@@ -375,8 +371,8 @@ SetSecurityLabel(const ObjectAddress *object,
375371
Int32GetDatum(object->objectSubId));
376372
ScanKeyInit(&keys[3],
377373
Anum_pg_seclabel_provider,
378-
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_NAMEEQ,
379-
CStringGetDatum(provider));
374+
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_TEXTEQ,
375+
CStringGetTextDatum(provider));
380376

381377
pg_seclabel = heap_open(SecLabelRelationId, RowExclusiveLock);
382378

‎src/backend/nodes/copyfuncs.c

Lines changed: 1 addition & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1839,8 +1839,7 @@ _copyInferenceElem(const InferenceElem *from)
18391839

18401840
COPY_NODE_FIELD(expr);
18411841
COPY_SCALAR_FIELD(infercollid);
1842-
COPY_SCALAR_FIELD(inferopfamily);
1843-
COPY_SCALAR_FIELD(inferopcinputtype);
1842+
COPY_SCALAR_FIELD(inferopclass);
18441843

18451844
return newnode;
18461845
}

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)