[3.8] gh-95778: CVE-2020-10735: Prevent DoS by very large int()#96503
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
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
Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith <greg@krypto.org>
Fixes test_ast and test_compile.
Ned pointed this out on the 3.7 branch, it matches other patch changes and stands out better.
tiran added the 🔨 test-with-buildbots 
bedevere-bot commented Sep 2, 2022
bedevere-bot removed the 🔨 test-with-buildbots MemberAuthor
gpshead commented Sep 4, 2022
wait for #96537 to be integrated into this PR before merging, i'll remove the do-not-merge label then. |
Per mdickinson@'s comment on the main branch PR.
…#96537) Converting a large enough `int` to a decimal string raises `ValueError` as expected. However, the raise comes _after_ the quadratic-time base-conversion algorithm has run to completion. For effective DOS prevention, we need some kind of check before entering the quadratic-time loop. Oops! =) The quick fix: essentially we catch _most_ values that exceed the threshold up front. Those that slip through will still be on the small side (read: sufficiently fast), and will get caught by the existing check so that the limit remains exact. The justification for the current check. The C code check is: ```c max_str_digits / (3 * PyLong_SHIFT) <= (size_a - 11) / 10 ``` In GitHub markdown math-speak, writing $M$ for `max_str_digits`, $L$ for `PyLong_SHIFT` and $s$ for `size_a`, that check is: $$\left\lfloor\frac{M}{3L}\right\rfloor \le \left\lfloor\frac{s - 11}{10}\right\rfloor$$ From this it follows that $$\frac{M}{3L} < \frac{s-1}{10}$$ hence that $$\frac{L(s-1)}{M} > \frac{10}{3} > \log_2(10).$$ So $$2^{L(s-1)} > 10^M.$$ But our input integer $a$ satisfies $|a| \ge 2^{L(s-1)}$, so $|a|$ is larger than $10^M$. This shows that we don't accidentally capture anything _below_ the intended limit in the check. <!-- gh-issue-number: pythongh-95778 --> * Issue: pythongh-95778 <!-- /gh-issue-number --> Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith [Google LLC] <greg@krypto.org>
gpshead added the 🔨 test-with-buildbots bedevere-bot commented Sep 4, 2022
bedevere-bot removed the 🔨 test-with-buildbots 
Contributor
ambv commented Sep 5, 2022
@tiran can wasm32 failures be ignored here? This is a 3.8 backport and that version is not supported on WASM? Those fail to build with errors like |
Contributor
ambv commented Sep 5, 2022
Unfortunately, there are legitimate failures here. Arch ASAN Debug https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/586/builds/778: Arch ASAN https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/581/builds/779: Arch USAN https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/720/builds/676: FreeBSD Shared https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/203/builds/821: s390x https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/111/builds/784: Gentoo with X https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/344/builds/803: At least the ASAN and USAN failures are definitely related to this change, the others might be related indirectly. |
MemberAuthor
gpshead commented Sep 5, 2022
what makes you think those are related to this change? Arch ASAN 3.8 both: https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/590 and https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/580 show red for six months on 3.8. and Arch USAN has not 3.8 bot and history at all. |
MemberAuthor
gpshead commented Sep 5, 2022
If you want a baseline for those bots on 3.8 with no changes, I ran them via #96586. |
ypankovych approved these changes Sep 5, 2022
Contributor
ambv commented Sep 5, 2022
We looked into this. 3.7 and 3.8 are typically not running address and undefined behavior sanitizers on buildbots. The label-driven trigger on PRs is overly broad and runs configurations that aren't used by us for the oldest branches in regular testing. At least 3.8 fails ASAN and UBSAN without #96503 applied as well. I'm landing this. |
bedevere-bot commented Sep 5, 2022
|
bedevere-bot commented Sep 5, 2022
|
bedevere-bot commented Sep 5, 2022
|
bedevere-bot commented Sep 6, 2022
|
Contributor
mgorny commented Sep 6, 2022
FYI, we're skipping |
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
7 participants
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.
Integer to and from text conversions via CPython's bignum
inttype is not safe against denial of service attacks due to malicious input. Very large input strings with hundred thousands of digits can consume several CPU seconds.This PR comes fresh from a pile of work done in our private PSRT security response team repo.
This backports #96499 aka 511ca94
Signed-off-by: Christian Heimes [Red Hat] christian@python.org
Tons-of-polishing-up-by: Gregory P. Smith [Google] greg@krypto.org
Reviews via the private PSRT repo via many others (see the NEWS entry in the PR).
I wrote up a one pager for the release managers.