How to write strings and integers in a ring buffer? - c++

How to write strings and integers in a ring buffer? I would like to write multiple strings and integers into the ring buffer but my c++ knowledge is limited. If you need some more info, please let me know. I appreciate any help that you can provide.
Here are the integer and string variables that I want to write and the write function of the ring buffer:
string payload;
int byte_pos;
size_t ringbuffer::write(u_char *data, size_t bytes)
{
if (bytes == 0) return 0;
size_t capacity = capacity_;
size_t bytes_to_write = std::min(bytes, capacity - size_);
// Write in a single step
if (bytes_to_write <= capacity - end_index_)
{
memcpy(data_ + end_index_, data, bytes_to_write);
end_index_ += bytes_to_write;
if (end_index_ == capacity) end_index_ = 0;
}
// Write in two steps
else
{
size_t size_1 = capacity - end_index_;
memcpy(data_ + end_index_, data, size_1);
size_t size_2 = bytes_to_write - size_1;
memcpy(data_, data + size_1, size_2);
end_index_ = size_2;
}
size_ += bytes_to_write;
return bytes_to_write;
}

You have to convert your std::string variable into a C-style pointer to char:
string payload;
char* cpayload = payload.c_str();
int len = strlen(cpayload);
ringbuffer::write(cpayload, len*sizeof(char));

This is what seems to be working but I haven't verified what exactly I am getting in the ringbuffer yet, no errors though.
ringbuffer::write((u_char*) payload.c_str(), payload.length());
ringbuffer::write((u_char*) &byte_pos, sizeof(byte_pos));

Related

any wrong I done for using Openssl for calculating HMAC_SHA1 hash value?

int computeHMACSHA1Hash(const char * unhashedcstr, char * hashedcstr, const char * key, int returncode)
{
string hashed;
size_t unhashlength = strlen(unhashedcstr);
char * nonconstunhashcstr = new char[unhashlength];
strcpy_s(nonconstunhashcstr, unhashlength + 1, unhashedcstr);
unsigned char* pixels = reinterpret_cast<unsigned char*>(nonconstunhashcstr);
returncode = 0;
HMAC_CTX* context = HMAC_CTX_new();
size_t unhashedstrlength = sizeof(unhashedcstr);
if (context != NULL)
{
if (HMAC_Init_ex(context, key, strlen(key), EVP_sha1(), NULL))
{
if (HMAC_Update(context, pixels, unhashedstrlength))
{
unsigned char hash[EVP_MAX_MD_SIZE];
unsigned int lengthOfHash = 0;
if (HMAC_Final(context, hash, &lengthOfHash))
{
std::stringstream ss;
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < lengthOfHash; ++i)
{
ss << std::hex << std::setw(2) << std::setfill('0') << (int)hash[i];
}
hashed = ss.str();
size_t outputSize = hashed.length() + 1; // +1 for null terminator
strcpy_s(hashedcstr, outputSize, hashed.c_str());
returncode = 0;
}
else
{
returncode = 7;
}
}
else
{
returncode = 6;
}
}
else
{
returncode = 5;
}
HMAC_CTX_free(context);
}
else
{
returncode = 4;
}
return returncode;
}
int main()
{
const char * unhashedcstr = "a=services&l=v1&p=open&k=SD58292829&i=20200918125249803&n=2124&t=1600404769&f={\"invoiceCode\": \"11111\",\"invoiceNo\": \"2222\",\"inTaxAmount\": \"\",\"exTaxAmount\": \"\"}";
char * hashedcstr = new char[100];
int returncode = 0;
const char * key = "SD886A11B0EE428F";
int result = computeHMACSHA1Hash(unhashedcstr, hashedcstr, key, returncode);
return 0;
}
I tried the code above to calculating the HMAC SHA1 hash value for a content, but compared the results on https://www.freeformatter.com/hmac-generator.html#before-output
it looks like I didn't do it right. I'm not sure what I have done wrong though. Any help would be appreciated.
It turned out the result was "d916b4c2d277319bbf18076c158f0cbcf6c3bc57", while on the website https://www.freeformatter.com/hmac-generator.html#before-output, the result was "71482b292f2b2a47b3eca6dad5e7350566d60963". Even when I tried using the string "a=services&l=v1&p=open&k=SD58292829&i=20200918125249803&n=2124&t=1600404769&f={"invoiceCode": "11111","invoiceNo": "2222","inTaxAmount": "","exTaxAmount": ""}" which removed the escape characters, the result was "09be98b6129c149e685ed57a1d19651a602cda0d". It didn't match the correct one.
Is there anything wrong with my code?
Your hash is calculated over the bytes a=se, which are the first four bytes of the whole input string. Thus, you get d916b4c2d277319bbf18076c158f0cbcf6c3bc57 instead of the 09be98b6129c149e685ed57a1d19651a602cda0d that would correspond to the whole string.
The reason is this:
size_t unhashedstrlength = sizeof(unhashedcstr);
Here, sizeof(unhashedcstr) is the size of the unhashedcstr pointer itself (which is of type const char*), not the size of the null-terminated C-style string this unhashedcstr pointer is pointing to. You are compiling a 32-bit program, so the size of a pointer is 4 bytes. Thus, unhashedstrlength is 4.
To get the length of the C-style string, you can do this instead:
size_t unhashedstrlength = strlen(unhashedcstr);
But just as a comment, in modern C++, you should avoid using raw pointers (such as const char*, char*, unsigned char*), C functions (like strlen(), strcpy_s()) and manual memory management (new / delete and new[] / delete[]). You should prefer to use std::string and/or std::vector<unsigned char> instead, wherever possible. When you need to pass a buffer's address to an API function, you can use std::string::data(), std::vector::data(), or more generally, std::data().
By the way, you currently leak memory: you dynamically allocate buffers using new[], but you never deallocate those (using delete[]). So that memory is released by the OS only after the program exits. This is called a memory leak.

longest palindromic substring. Error: AddressSanitizer, heap overflow

#include<string>
#include<cstring>
class Solution {
void shift_left(char* c, const short unsigned int bits) {
const unsigned short int size = sizeof(c);
memmove(c, c+bits, size - bits);
memset(c+size-bits, 0, bits);
}
public:
string longestPalindrome(string s) {
char* output = new char[s.length()];
output[0] = s[0];
string res = "";
char* n = output;
auto e = s.begin() + 1;
while(e != s.end()) {
char letter = *e;
char* c = n;
(*++n) = letter;
if((letter != *c) && (c == &output[0] || letter != (*--c)) ) {
++e;
continue;
}
while((++e) != s.end() && c != &output[0]) {
if((letter = *e) != (*--c)) {
const unsigned short int bits = c - output + 1;
shift_left(output, bits);
n -= bits;
break;
}
(*++n) = letter;
}
string temp(output);
res = temp.length() > res.length()? temp : res;
shift_left(output, 1);
--n;
}
return res;
}
};
input string longestPalindrome("babad");
the program works fine and prints out "bab" as the longest palindrome but there's a heap overflow somewhere. Error like this appears:
Read of size 6 at ...memory address... thread T0
"babad" is size 5 and after going over this for an hour. I don't see the point where the iteration ever exceeds 5
There is 3 pointers here that iterate.
e as the element of string s.
n which is the pointer to the next char of output.
and c which is a copy of n and decrements until it reaches the address of &output[0].
maybe it's something with the memmove or memset since I've never used it before.
I'm completely lost
TL;DR : mixture of char* and std::string are not really good idea if you don't understand how exactly it works.
If you want to length of string you cant do this const unsigned short int size = sizeof(c); (sizeof will return size of pointer (which is commonly 4 on 32-bit machine and 8 on 64-bit machine). You must do this instead: const size_t size = strlen(c);
Address sanitizers is right that you (indirectly) are trying to get an memory which not belongs to you.
How does constructor of string from char* works?
Answer: char* is considered as c-style string, which means that it must be null '\0' terminated.
More details: constructor of string from char* calls strlen-like function which looks like about this:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/string/byte/strlen
int strlen(char *begin){
int k = 0;
while (*begin != '\0'){
++k;
++begin;
}
return k;
}
If c-style char* string does not contain '\0' it cause accessing memory which doesn't belongs to you.
How to fix?
Answer (two options):
not use mixture of char* and std::string
char* output = new char[s.length()]; replace with char* output = new char[s.length() + 1]; memset(output, 0, s.length() + 1);
Also you must delete all memory which you newed. So add delete[] output; before return res;

C++ Call string into function?

Not sure how to exactly explain this, sorry. I'm creating a function to find the first instance of a char in an array built by a given string. I have the function to create an array from the string and loop through the array, but not sure how to put it the array into the find function.
the tester is built like
stringName("Test test test");
stringName.find("e",0); //where 0 is the starting position, so it would return 1.
int SuperString::find(char c, int start) {
// put array grabber thing here
size = *(&data + 1) - data;
for(int i = start; i < size ; i++){
if(data[i] == c){
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
This is what I have to make the string into an array.
SuperString::SuperString(std::string str) {
size = str.size();
data = new char[size];
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) {
data[i] = str.at(i);
}
}
This is probably something easy I'm missing, but any help is appreciated.
You are passing a string literal, specifically a const char[2], where a single char is expected. Use 'e' instead of "e":
stringName.find('e', 0);
More importantly, size = *(&data + 1) - data; will only work when data is a (reference to a) fixed array (see How does *(&arr + 1) - arr give the length in elements of array arr?). It will not work when data is a pointer to an array, as it is in your case since you are allocating the array with new char[]. You will have to keep track of the array's size separately, which you appear to be doing, except that you are not actually using the size you obtained in the SuperString constructor. Just get rid of the line in find() that is trying to re-calculate size, use the value you already have:
int SuperString::find(char c, int start) {
// size = *(&data + 1) - data; // <-- GET RID OF THIS
for(int i = start; i < size; ++i){
if (data[i] == c){
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
That being said, Your SuperString class can be greatly simplified if you just make its data member be a std::string instead of char*, eg:
#include <string>
class SuperString {
private:
std::string data;
...
public:
SuperString(const std::string &str);
int find(char c, int start = 0);
...
};
SuperString::SuperString(const std::string &str) : data(str) {
}
int SuperString::find(char c, int start) {
return (int) data.find(c, start);
}

How can I split a string into chunks of 1024 with iterator and string_view

I want to split a string into chunks of 1024 just like this.
std::string content;
std::vector<std::string_view>
data{_iterator<std::string>{content, 1024},
_iterator<std::string>{}};
It's graceful and efficient, but I have no idea what to do.
Probably not as elegant as you want, but try something like this:
std::string content = ...;
std::vector<std::string_view> data;
if (!content.empty())
{
data.reserve((content.size() + 1023) / 1024);
std::string_view content_view = content;
size_t i = 0;
do
{
data.push_back(content_view.substr(i, 1024));
i += data.back().size();
}
while (i < content.size());
}
Alternatively:
std::string content = ...;
std::vector<std::string_view> data;
if (!content.emoty())
{
data.reserve((content.size() + 1023) / 1024);
const char* ptr = content.c_str();
size_t size = content.size();
for(size_t i = 0; i < size; i += 1024) {
data.emplace_back(ptr+i, std::min(size-i, 1024));
}
}
If you really want to initialize the vector using chunk-sized iterators, you will have to write you own iterator class from scratch to handle that. There is no standard iterator class that will iterate a string (or any other container) in chunks of N elements.
The most elegant way I can think of now.
std::string_view data = content;
std::vector<std::string_view> chunks;
for (int i = 0; i < data.size(); i += 1024)
chunks.push_back(data.substr(i, 1024));

C++ memset / memcpy / strcpy implementation - check for buffer overflows

I have made basic memset / memcpy / strcpy implementations in C++, which work fine. However, is there a way of detecting buffer overflows if I was to do something like this:
Example:
int main()
{
char *buf = (char *)calloc(10, sizeof(char));
__strcpy(buf, "Hello World");
// buffer size: 10, copy size: 12 (including '\0') - overflow
}
Implementations (typedef unsigned int UINT):
void *__memset(void *_Dst, int _Val, UINT _Size)
{
UINT *buf = (UINT *)_Dst;
while (_Size--)
{
*buf++ = (UINT)_Val;
}
return _Dst;
}
void *__memcpy(void *_Dst, const void *_Src, UINT _Size)
{
UINT *buf = (UINT *)_Dst;
UINT *src = (UINT *)_Src;
while (_Size--)
{
*buf++ = *src++;
}
return _Dst;
}
char *__strcpy(char *_Dst, const char *_Src)
{
while ((*_Dst++ = *_Src++) != '\0');
return _Dst;
}
Buffer overflows are not detectable in your program. The operating system is detecting them. You only can check for potential pitfalls in the code (if/else,asserts,exceptions). Or you use profiling tools like valgrind.
You can detect overflows, but only if you also implement your own memory-management routines. We used to do this when we wrote embedded software that ran on devices without a "real" operating system, before there were very many good debugging tools.
The idea is to build your own wrapper around malloc() (and calloc(), in your case), that will allocate a few more bytes than the caller requests. Then set up a few "guard bytes" before and after the memory that was requested and initialize the entire buffer with recognizable data. Also build a wrapper around free() that checks for the guard bytes before releasing the memory and generates an error if they've changed.
#define GUARD_LEN = 4 // Arbitrary number of guard bytes.
#define GUARD_BYTE = 0xA5 // Arbitrary but recognizable: 10100101b
#define UNUSED_BYTE = 0x96 // Arbitrary but recognizable: 10010110b
#define FREED_BYTE = 0xC3 // Arbitrary but recognizable: 11000011b
#define MAX_ALLOCS = 1024 // Max # of malloc'ed buffers.
struct {
void *addr; // Address of malloc'ed buffer
size_t len; // Number of requested bytes
} Allocs[MAX_ALLOCS];
// Allocates and initializes memory.
void *chk_malloc(size_t length) {
// Allocate memory for buffer + guard bytes.
void *mem = malloc(length + 2*GUARD_LEN);
if (mem == NULL) {
return NULL;
}
// Initialize: [GUARD][UNUSED_BUFFER][GUARD]
// Caller's usable memory starts after GUARD.
void *buffer = mem + GUARD_LEN;
memset(mem, GUARD_BYTE, GUARD_LEN);
memset(buffer, UNUSED_BYTE, length);
memset(buffer + length, GUARD_BYTE, GUARD_LEN);
// Remember the address and length.
// Simplified for demonstration; you may want this to be smarter.
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_ALLOCS; ++i) {
if (Allocs[i].addr == NULL) {
Allocs[i].addr = buffer;
Allocs[i].len = length;
return buffer;
}
return NULL; // Should also indicate MAX_ALLOCS is too small.
}
// Checks that buffer is filled with val.
bool chk_filled(void *buffer, char val, size_t len) {
for (int i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
if (buffer[i] != val) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
// Checks for over/underrun and releases memory.
void chk_free(void *buffer) {
// Find the buffer in the array of alloc'ed buffers.
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_ALLOCS; ++i) {
if (Allocs[i].addr == buffer) {
void *guard = buffer - GUARD_LEN; // Initial guard bytes.
if (!chk_filled(guard, GUARD_BYTE, GUARD_LEN)) {
// Underrun
}
end_guard = buffer + Allocs[i].len; // Terminal guard bytes.
if (!chk_filled(end_guard, GUARD_BYTE, GUARD_LEN)) {
// Overrun
}
// Mark the buffer as free and release it.
memset(guard, FREED_BYTE, Allocs[i].len + 2*GUARD_LEN);
Allocs[i].addr = -Allocs[i].addr; // See text below.
free(guard);
return;
}
}
// Error: attempt to free unalloc'ed memory.
}
In reality you'd probably want this to be smarter in several ways:
You might not want to have a limit of MAX_ALLOCS.
Check for allocated memory that isn't freed when the program exits.
Print Allocs[] on exit.
Print more information and/or exit immediately when an error is detected.
The safer way to detect buffer overflows is by providing your own implementation of calloc instead. Provide a few bytes padding before and after the returned block, set them to a known value (NOT 0 or 255), and when calling free check that they're untouched. Also, after calling free you should overwrite the whole block (including the padding on both sides) to check for double free calls.
You may need the size of buffer you are owing, which can be used to iterate that many locations to copy checking buffer overflow if any as shown below,
char *__strcpy(char *_Dst, const char *_Src, int size)
{
while ((*_Dst++ = *_Src++) != '\0' && size--); //Iterate/copy to allocated Bytes
return _Dst;
}
int main()
{
int size;
char *buf = (char *)calloc(size, sizeof(char)); // Here you know the size of buf
__strcpy(buf, "Hello World", size); // Send size as parameter
// buffer size: 10, copy size: 12 (including '\0') - overflow
}
All your mem* functions are invalid. They copy (or set) objects of type unsigned int while they have to copy (or set) objects of type unsigned char. Take into account that __Size can be an odd number.
These functions theirself are unable to check buffer overflow without changing their declarations.
Also even the third function is invalid
char *__strcpy(char *_Dst, const char *_Src)
{
while ((*_Dst++ = *_Src++) != '\0');
return _Dst;
}
inside the function pointer _Dst was changed and points to the terminating zero. This address you return from the function while you have to return the address of the first character of the string pointed by _Dst.
The same is valid for the first two functions.
There can be a real C++ implementation, if you use arrays instead of pointers to char. You could define your functions as template and make the array size a template argument.
template < std::size_t D >
char* strcpy( char ( &dest )[ D ], const char* source )
{
assert( D > std::strlen( source ) );
...
}
As you really just need the destination size, I've left the source size out.
int main()
{
char buf[ 10 ];
// would assert, if assertions are enabled.
strcpy( buf, "Hello World" );
}