Hi,

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Alex Converse <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Ronald S. Bultje <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Ronald S. Bultje <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> From: "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> They cause various issues further down in demuxing.
>>> ---
>>>  libavformat/asfdec.c |    6 +++++-
>>>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/libavformat/asfdec.c b/libavformat/asfdec.c
>>> index 2922ecf..01411fa 100644
>>> --- a/libavformat/asfdec.c
>>> +++ b/libavformat/asfdec.c
>>> @@ -202,6 +202,8 @@ static int asf_read_file_properties(AVFormatContext *s, 
>>> int64_t size)
>>>     asf->hdr.flags              = avio_rl32(pb);
>>>     asf->hdr.min_pktsize        = avio_rl32(pb);
>>>     asf->hdr.max_pktsize        = avio_rl32(pb);
>>> +    if (asf->hdr.min_pktsize >= (1U<<29))
>>> +        return AVERROR_INVALIDDATA;
>
> This >= why in your last similar patch did you use strictly >?

Oversight. I think >= is more correct.

Ronald
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to