dominicc@, could you please take a look and help us to find right owner?
Thank you.

I'm guessing the regression range is wrong and it is just pointing at this:

d61bcad3017676cfbc1a53c65a51ffcef331b56e

I'm going to bump the priority down on this; leaking is not as bad as UAF which is often the alternative given the complexities of libxml2 memory management.

I think this is the same root cause as  Issue 692817 .

ClusterFuzz has detected this issue as fixed in range 480737:480767.

Detailed report: https://clusterfuzz.com/testcase?key=6692732333719552

Fuzzer: libFuzzer_libxml_xml_read_memory_fuzzer
Job Type: libfuzzer_chrome_asan
Platform Id: linux

Crash Type: Indirect-leak
Crash Address: 
Crash State:
  xmlBufResize
  xmlBufAdd
  xmlStringGetNodeList
  
Sanitizer: address (ASAN)

Regressed: https://clusterfuzz.com/revisions?job=libfuzzer_chrome_asan&range=450688:450717
Fixed: https://clusterfuzz.com/revisions?job=libfuzzer_chrome_asan&range=480737:480767

Reproducer Testcase: https://clusterfuzz.com/download?testcase_id=6692732333719552


See https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/testing/libfuzzer/reproducing.md for more information.

If you suspect that the result above is incorrect, try re-doing that job on the test case report page.