Live data from Hacker News

AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

github.com

11–20 of 43 posts

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#11
post #9
post #8

It doesn't work on Latest Chrome beta or hacker news. But a HK clone was crashed. http://news.dbanotes.net/

Yup, seems to be fixed.

Suggestion from a reply to my bug report (filed under security so it's non-public) points to a dupe of:

https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=472899

and fixed in:

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/5922e15ca3d...

FWIW

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#12
post #10

I'm pretty sure this is https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=464270 , which was fixed by https://codereview.chromium.org/1007323003 .

Wow, that's an even better guess than the other (not mine) I posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9326350

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#13
post #12
post #10

I'm pretty sure this is https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=464270 , which was fixed by https://codereview.chromium.org/1007323003 .

Wow, that's an even better guess than the other (not mine) I posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9326350

It's not just a guess, I broke it and I fixed it :)

Can I ask why you took the approach of making a Github repo to post this rather than filing a Chromium bug?

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#14
post #13
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that's an even better guess than the other (not mine) I posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9326350

It's not just a guess, I broke it and I fixed it :) Can I ask why you took the approach of making a Github repo to post this rather than filing a Chromium bug?

I did file a Chromium bug last week, #472347. I filed under security (as I was unsure) so it's not public, but it was pretty much immediately marked as 'Won't Fix'. Hence the repo ;)

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#15
Tangentially related, I was performing an analysis of the billions of links available in Common Crawl[1] and ran across an interesting error: there was one link where the port number was 18779690999[2].

The library I was using converted the port text into a 32 bit integer but the library didn't account for the possibility that someone supplied a port well over the 32 bit int limits. I was curious how many tools that use URLs would suffer similar fates and whether there might be any interesting security vulnerabilities.

Just goes to show, no matter how much crazy you've seen, there's likely crazier things hidden from you across the Internet ;)

[1]: http://commoncrawl.org/ [2]: https://twitter.com/Smerity/status/576339945041707008

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#16
post #15

Tangentially related, I was performing an analysis of the billions of links available in Common Crawl[1] and ran across an interesting error: there was one link where the port number was 18779690999[2]. The library I was using converted the port text into a 32 bit integer but the library didn't account for the possibility that someone supplied a port well over the 32 bit int limits. I was curious how many tools that…

The port number is supposed to be a 16-bit number though. So, anything above 65535 is malformed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_%28computer_networking%29

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#19
post #15

Tangentially related, I was performing an analysis of the billions of links available in Common Crawl[1] and ran across an interesting error: there was one link where the port number was 18779690999[2]. The library I was using converted the port text into a 32 bit integer but the library didn't account for the possibility that someone supplied a port well over the 32 bit int limits. I was curious how many tools that…

Sure looks like a toll-free phone number: 1-877-969-0999. Google hints relation to reporting natural gas leaks.

Edit - followed links

Re: AwSnap – This link crashes Chrome

#20
I hope this doesn't come across as negative but why post this on HN? Why not just file a bug on crbug.com? Browsers have bugs, all them. It seems kind of negative to turn it into a spectacle rather than just be kind and report the bug to the team.
Post reply on HN