Re: Dangerous commands (was:[ANNOUNCE] fstests: for-next branch updated to v2024.02.04)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]



On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 08:51:28AM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 11:16:16PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 03:09:51PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > reading [1] and how late it was found that effectively a "rm -rf /" can
> > > happen makes me worried about what I can expect from fstests after git
> > > pull. Many people contribute and the number for custom _cleanup()
> > > functions with unquoted 'rm' commands is just asking for more problems.
> > > 
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240205060016.7fgiyafbnrvf5chj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > 
> > > Unquoted arguments in shell scripts is IMO a big anti-pattern,
> > > unfortunately present everywhere in xfstests since the beginning.
> > > Rewriting all scripts would be quite a lot of work, could you at least
> > > provide safe versions of the cleanup helpers?
> > 
> > Hi David,
> > 
> > Thanks for taking care about it :)
> > 
> > > 
> > > For example:
> > > 
> > > _rm_tmp() {
> > >     rm -rf -- $tmp
> > 
> > It's "$tmp.*"
> > 
> > May I ask what problem does the "--" hope to avoid? If the "$tmp" is empty,
> > "rm -rf" and "rm -rf --"" looks like both doing nothing. So what kind
> > of situation does the "--" hope to fix?
> > 
> > The root problem in above [1] is about "${FOO}*". If someone does "rm -rf ${FOO}*"
> > in its custom _cleanup_xxxxx function, then it's dangerous if "$FOO" is empty.
> > 
> > I thought some ways to avoid that:
> > 1) Try to avoid doing rm -rf ${FOO}*, if not necessary.
> > 2) Must checks [ -n "$FOO" ] before doing any rm -rf ${FOO}*
> > 3) Someone's custom _cleanup_xxxxx better to be called before default _cleanup
> > does "cd /".
> > 4) Think about bringing in someone "Static program analysis" tool about bash
> > script, but I don't know if there're someone good, feel free to give me
> > suggestions.
> 
> "--" prevents the following arguments from being interpreted as options if they
> begin with "-".  That's a good practice, but it doesn't help with ${FOO} being
> empty.  To cause the script to exit if ${FOO} is empty, it can be written as
> ${FOO:?}.  Alternatively, 'set -u' can be used.

I said that four days ago.  Did nobody receive that reply?

https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20240225165128.GA1128@sol.localdomain/T/#m0efd851c5a1fb0dbe418f4aff818d20f4355638b

--D

> - Eric
> 




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux