-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33.2k
gh-126834: Properly read zip64 archives with non-empty zip64 extensible data sector in Zip64 end of central directory record #126841
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
VladRassokhin
wants to merge
3
commits into
python:main
Choose a base branch
from
VladRassokhin:zip64-additional-data
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+5
−5
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think
struct.unpackreturns relative to the struct, and that will be atoffset - sizeEndCentDir64Locator(where it was read from). SEEK_SET / 0 isn't right asreloffis a relative position from where the struct was read, not an absolute position in the file.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Although the variable is named
reloffand the spec states "relative offset of the zip64 end of central directory record" without specifying relative to what, in reality it's offset from the beginning of the file. See code which writes itcpython/Lib/zipfile/__init__.py
Line 2078 in 2313f84
Also, the same in the libzip code: https://github.com/nih-at/libzip/blob/d0ebf7fa268ae2e59e575cb3a72e6bc259e3fdd8/lib/zip_open.c#L853
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@cmaloney wdyt on renaming
reloff, worth changing to e.g.eocd_offset?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Definitely would be clearer to me, but not sure it's worth the extra noise in the diff though / additional lines changed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The offsets are complicated by data that may precede the start of the zip content which is why some of the tests are failing.
reloffis the number of bytes from the start of the first local file header in the zip which may not be the actual start of the file. I can't think of a good way of directly computing the start of the zip64 end of record block if there's data preceding the start of the zip part of the file. Might have to do a bit of a search.My code needs improvement as
data = fpin.read(loc_pos - reloff)might read a substantial amount of data if there's a big blob of data before the zip. It would also be a good idea to check that the sizes of the offsets are consistent with regards to:szbytes from the position just after theszfieldstringEndArchive64signature found usingrfindis the same position as thestringEndArchive64signature that is found directly after the central directory.