News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Zlib Critical Vulnerability by rurban on Saturday October 15, 2022 @02:34AM (#33212334)
needs (Aug) btw.

Does this affect zlib-ng also?

Once I've looked into zlib code a few years ago, I abandoned it. It's a mess, only comparable to openssl, sqlite and bash.

Re:Zlib Critical Vulnerability by SahAssar on Saturday October 15, 2022 @04:28AM (#33212943)
> It's a mess, only comparable to openssl, sqlite and bash.

Why do you consider sqlite abandoned or a mess?

Re:Zlib Critical Vulnerability by rurban on Saturday October 15, 2022 @03:25PM (#33217788)
because is almost impossible to fix, harden or make secure. it's not just the broken overall architecture, which eg enables write on read, also it's internal code. eg the various attempts to get FTS. it's worse than openssl, which gets all the FLAC
Re:Zlib Critical Vulnerability by SahAssar on Saturday October 15, 2022 @06:58PM (#33219427)
> because is almost impossible to fix, harden or make secure.

I'd like some more context on this. Especially since it is used in many security-critical contexts currently.

Re:Zlib Critical Vulnerability by rurban on Sunday October 16, 2022 @06:59AM (#33222696)
Re:Zlib Critical Vulnerability by jomar on Saturday October 15, 2022 @10:54AM (#33215366)
Zlib-ng doesn't contain the same code, but it appears that their equivalent inflate() when used with their inflateGetHeader() implementation was affected by a similar problem: https://github.com/zlib-ng/zlib-ng/pull/1328

Also similarly, most client code will be unaffected because `state->head` will be NULL, because they (most client code) won't have used inflateGetHeader() at all.