Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new pixmap destroy notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new pixmap destroy notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new screen close notify hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Wrapping ScreenRec's function pointers is problematic for many reasons,
so use the new window destructor hook instead.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
SyncChangeAlarmAttributes() would apply the various changes while
checking for errors.
If one of the changes triggers an error, the changes for the trigger,
counter or delta value would remain, possibly leading to inconsistent
changes.
Postpone the actual changes until we're sure nothing else can go wrong.
Related to CVE-2025-26601, ZDI-CAN-25870
Signed-off-by: Olivier Fourdan <ofourdan@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1828>
We do not want to return a failure at the very last step in
SyncInitTrigger() after having all changes applied.
SyncAddTriggerToSyncObject() must not fail on memory allocation, if the
allocation of the SyncTriggerList fails, trigger a FatalError() instead.
Related to CVE-2025-26601, ZDI-CAN-25870
Signed-off-by: Olivier Fourdan <ofourdan@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1828>
In SyncInitTrigger(), we would set the CheckTrigger function before
validating the counter value.
As a result, if the counter value overflowed, we would leave the
function SyncInitTrigger() with the CheckTrigger applied but without
updating the trigger object.
To avoid that issue, move the portion of code checking for the trigger
check value before updating the CheckTrigger function.
Related to CVE-2025-26601, ZDI-CAN-25870
Signed-off-by: Olivier Fourdan <ofourdan@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1828>
When changing an alarm, the change mask values are evaluated one after
the other, changing the trigger values as requested and eventually,
SyncInitTrigger() is called.
SyncInitTrigger() will evaluate the XSyncCACounter first and may free
the existing sync object.
Other changes are then evaluated and may trigger an error and an early
return, not adding the new sync object.
This can be used to cause a use after free when the alarm eventually
triggers.
To avoid the issue, delete the existing sync object as late as possible
only once we are sure that no further error will cause an early exit.
CVE-2025-26601, ZDI-CAN-25870
This vulnerability was discovered by:
Jan-Niklas Sohn working with Trend Micro Zero Day Initiative
Signed-off-by: Olivier Fourdan <ofourdan@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1828>
Make the code a bit easier to read by using initialization of the reply
structs, at the point of declaration. Most of them aren't written to later,
just passed into WriteReplyToClient(). Also dropping some useless zero
assignments (struct initializers automatically zero-out unmentioned fields).
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1795>
It's more robust / easier understandable programming style to use explicit
switch statements, case'ing on the constants defined in the protocol header,
instead of implicitly via a some opaque call table. It's also done this
way in the other extensions, so making the code a bit more consistent.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1591>
Right now, we're assuming that even when deep nesting involved, the proc
vector is always set to a valid function. One the one hand it requires
extra dummy procs in some cases, OTOH it's making upcoming refactoring
of the code flow unnecessarily complex.
The big plot (of subsequent commits) is splitting out the extension's
(and possibly subsystem's) special logic out of the wrapping chain and
let them be executed independently from the DDX/drivers - when applicable
even only when the pixmap is really destroyed (not just unref'ed).
(At some later point, it might even become be actually a valid situation
that DestroyPixmap vector really being NULL.)
See: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1754
See: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1755
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests/1709>
