Hey, we found one memory issue about stack-buffer-overflow reported by the address sanitizer. The following is the bug report:

2023-03-28 07:05:04 Jepsen starting  /opt/redis/redis-server --protected-mode no --bind 0.0.0.0 --dbfilename redis.rdb --loadmodule /opt/redis/redisraft.so --raft.loglevel debug --raft.log-filename raftlog.db --raft.log-max-file-size 32000 --raft.log-max-cache-size 1000000 --raft.follower-proxy no
=================================================================
==4768==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7fffffffe510 at pc 0x00000058ab37 bp 0x7fffffffe330 sp 0x7fffffffe328
WRITE of size 4 at 0x7fffffffe510 thread T0
    #0 0x58ab36 in main /opt/fs/redis/src/server.c:6806:12
    #1 0x7ffff7ad809a in __libc_start_main /build/glibc-6iIyft/glibc-2.28/csu/../csu/libc-start.c:308:16
    #2 0x45aa89 in _start (/opt/redis/redis-server+0x45aa89)

Address 0x7fffffffe510 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 464 in frame
    #0 0x58a87f in main /opt/fs/redis/src/server.c:6798

  This frame has 5 object(s):
    [32, 48) 'tv' (line 6799)
    [64, 464) 'x' (line 6805) <== Memory access at offset 464 overflows this variable
    [528, 544) 'hashseed' (line 6872)
    [560, 564) 'argc_tmp' (line 6941)
    [576, 584) 'err_msg' (line 7034)
HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom stack unwind mechanism, swapcontext or vfork
      (longjmp and C++ exceptions *are* supported)
SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow /opt/fs/redis/src/server.c:6806:12 in main
Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
  0x10007fff7c50: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7c60: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 f2 f2
  0x10007fff7c70: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7c80: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7c90: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
=>0x10007fff7ca0: 00 00[f2]f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f8 f8 f2 f2 f8 f2
  0x10007fff7cb0: f8 f3 f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7cc0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7cd0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7ce0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x10007fff7cf0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
  Addressable:           00
  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
  Heap left redzone:       fa
  Freed heap region:       fd
  Stack left redzone:      f1
  Stack mid redzone:       f2
  Stack right redzone:     f3
  Stack after return:      f5
  Stack use after scope:   f8
  Global redzone:          f9
  Global init order:       f6
  Poisoned by user:        f7
  Container overflow:      fc
  Array cookie:            ac
  Intra object redzone:    bb
  ASan internal:           fe
  Left alloca redzone:     ca
  Right alloca redzone:    cb
  Shadow gap:              cc
==4768==ABORTING

Comment From: oranagra

@jerrytesting you please mention which redis version is it. from the command line arguments, i understand that's actually with https://github.com/RedisLabs/redisraft, so probably related to something the module does. @tezc FYI

Comment From: tezc

Seems like it throws the warning in main(), even before it loads the module. @jerrytesting please mention redis version.

Comment From: jerrytesting

The redis version that we used is v7.0.4. Yeah, we run redis with the redisraft module.

Comment From: tezc

looks like somehow line numbers don't match, I don't see that object x anywhere.

Comment From: oranagra

Maybe this is a modified version of redis (not the official one)? Where did you get it from? How is it built (compiler / flags)?

Comment From: jerrytesting

Yeah, we have some code annotations and instrumentation, which make the lines mismatch. After the double check, I think this bug may be from our instrumentation. Thanks for your investigation. I will close this issue if so.