Skip to content
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

Block insecure options and protocols by default #1521

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Dec 29, 2022

Conversation

stsewd
Copy link
Contributor

@stsewd stsewd commented Dec 24, 2022

This got a little longer than expected 😮‍💨, there were other places where git accepted ext:: URLs, like git pull/push/fetch <URL> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-remote-ext#_examples

And there are other config options that can be harmful, so I think we should just forbid the --config option, if anyone is relying on that option, they can opt-out with allow_unsafe_options=True.

--*-pack and --exec are the options that I found that could lead to RCE, but anyone allowing users to pass arbitrary options should be aware that it may be more of these, don't know.

This is still missing adding/updating tests.

This is on top of #1516
Fixes #1515

s-t-e-v-e-n-k and others added 2 commits December 23, 2022 16:16
Since the URL is passed directly to git clone, and the remote-ext helper
will happily execute shell commands, so by default disallow URLs that
contain a "::" unless a new unsafe_protocols kwarg is passed.
(CVE-2022-24439)

Fixes gitpython-developers#1515
Copy link
Member

@Byron Byron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks so much for having put in so much time and effort to help fixing this!

It mostly looks good to me, and once CI is working there shouldn't be much in the way of merging the PR.

git/cmd.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/test_repo.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
git/remote.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@stsewd stsewd marked this pull request as ready for review December 28, 2022 01:12
@stsewd
Copy link
Contributor Author

stsewd commented Dec 28, 2022

I have added/updated the tests.

Copy link
Member

@Byron Byron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks so much, this is tremendous work and great value for GitPython and all of its users. If you would like more recognition for this, please feel free to add an entry to changes.rst and include your name if you want. The same goes for the authors file.

That said, and if you feel you have a little more time and patience, I generally thought that asserting that these pwn files exist or don't exists where it's easily possible would help readability a lot while adding some assurance that it's actually, effectively working like it should. After all, having an exception raised is a side-effect of us ideally stopping the git command to be executed, but we don't really know unless we fail to observe its side-effect that we are trying to prevent.

If you don't have time, that's alright as well, just let me know and I will merge as is and get a new release ready.

Thanks so much!

test/test_remote.py Show resolved Hide resolved
test/test_repo.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@stsewd
Copy link
Contributor Author

stsewd commented Dec 29, 2022

Thanks so much, this is tremendous work and great value for GitPython and all of its users. If you would like more recognition for this, please feel free to add an entry to changes.rst and include your name if you want. The same goes for the authors file.

Thank you!

If you don't have time, that's alright as well, just let me know and I will merge as is and get a new release ready.

I'll try to update the PR later today or tomorrow

@Byron Byron added this to the v3.1.30 - Bugfixes milestone Dec 29, 2022
@Byron
Copy link
Member

Byron commented Dec 29, 2022

🙏🎉

@Byron Byron merged commit 678a8fe into gitpython-developers:main Dec 29, 2022
@stsewd stsewd deleted the block-insecure-options branch December 29, 2022 13:53
openstack-mirroring pushed a commit to openstack/openstack that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2023
* Update requirements from branch 'master'
  to 2aaf64dd91c63aa55f4cbe8c037a6f545e91b302
  - Merge "Bump GitPython to 3.1.30"
  - Bump GitPython to 3.1.30
    
    3.1.30 includes 2 sets of fixes for CVE-2022-24439:
      https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2022-24439
      gitpython-developers/GitPython#1515
    
    PRs:
      gitpython-developers/GitPython#1518
      gitpython-developers/GitPython#1521
    
    Signed-off-by: Lon Hohberger <lhh@redhat.com>
    Change-Id: I0def2d9801f0b20fcc9b613165a29dbced1fd2d7
openstack-mirroring pushed a commit to openstack/requirements that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2023
3.1.30 includes 2 sets of fixes for CVE-2022-24439:
  https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2022-24439
  gitpython-developers/GitPython#1515

PRs:
  gitpython-developers/GitPython#1518
  gitpython-developers/GitPython#1521

Signed-off-by: Lon Hohberger <lhh@redhat.com>
Change-Id: I0def2d9801f0b20fcc9b613165a29dbced1fd2d7
netbsd-srcmastr pushed a commit to NetBSD/pkgsrc that referenced this pull request Jan 20, 2023
3.1.30
- Make injections of command-invocations harder or impossible for clone and others.
  See gitpython-developers/GitPython#1518 for details.
  Note that this might constitute a breaking change for some users, and if so please
  let us know and we add an opt-out to this.
- Prohibit insecure options and protocols by default, which is potentially a breaking change,
  but a necessary fix for gitpython-developers/GitPython#1515.
  Please take a look at the PR for more information and how to bypass these protections
  in case they cause breakage: gitpython-developers/GitPython#1521.
halstead pushed a commit to openembedded/openembedded-core that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2023
All versions of package gitpython are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution
(RCE) due to improper user input validation, which makes it possible to
inject a maliciously crafted remote URL into the clone command. Exploiting
this vulnerability is possible because the library makes external calls to
git without sufficient sanitization of input arguments.

CVE: CVE-2022-24439

Upstream-Status: Backport

Reference:
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1529
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1518
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1521

Signed-off-by: Narpat Mali <narpat.mali@windriver.com>
stefan-hartmann-lgs pushed a commit to hexagon-geo-surv/poky that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2023
All versions of package gitpython are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution
(RCE) due to improper user input validation, which makes it possible to
inject a maliciously crafted remote URL into the clone command. Exploiting
this vulnerability is possible because the library makes external calls to
git without sufficient sanitization of input arguments.

CVE: CVE-2022-24439

Upstream-Status: Backport

Reference:
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1529
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1518
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1521

(From OE-Core rev: 55f93e3786290dfa5ac72b5969bb2793f6a98bde)

Signed-off-by: Narpat Mali <narpat.mali@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
jpuhlman pushed a commit to MontaVista-OpenSourceTechnology/poky that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2023
Source: poky
MR: 124663
Type: Integration
Disposition: Merged from poky
ChangeID: 0721360
Description:

All versions of package gitpython are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution
(RCE) due to improper user input validation, which makes it possible to
inject a maliciously crafted remote URL into the clone command. Exploiting
this vulnerability is possible because the library makes external calls to
git without sufficient sanitization of input arguments.

CVE: CVE-2022-24439

Upstream-Status: Backport

Reference:
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1529
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1518
gitpython-developers/GitPython#1521

(From OE-Core rev: 55f93e3786290dfa5ac72b5969bb2793f6a98bde)

Signed-off-by: Narpat Mali <narpat.mali@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeremy A. Puhlman <jpuhlman@mvista.com>
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/GitPython that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2023
The tests of unsafe options are among those introduced originally
in gitpython-developers#1521. They are regression tests for gitpython-developers#1515 (CVE-2022-24439).
The unsafe options tests are paired: a test for the usual, default
behavior of forbidding the option, and a test for the behavior when
the option is explicitly allowed. Both tests use a payload that is
intended to produce the side effect of a file of a specific name
being created in a temporary directory.

All the tests work on Unix-like systems. On Windows, the tests of
the *allowed* cases are broken, and this commit marks them xfail.
However, this has implications for the tests of the default, secure
behavior, because until the "allowed" versions work on Windows, it
will be unclear if either are using a payload that is effective and
that corresponds to the way its effect is examined. (Fortunately,
all are working on other OSes, and the affected code under test
does not appear highly dependent on OS, so the fix is *probably*
fully working on Windows as well.)
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/GitPython that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2023
The tests of unsafe options are among those introduced originally
in gitpython-developers#1521. They are regression tests for gitpython-developers#1515 (CVE-2022-24439).
The unsafe options tests are paired: a test for the usual, default
behavior of forbidding the option, and a test for the behavior when
the option is explicitly allowed. Both tests use a payload that is
intended to produce the side effect of a file of a specific name
being created in a temporary directory.

All the tests work on Unix-like systems. On Windows, the tests of
the *allowed* cases are broken, and this commit marks them xfail.
However, this has implications for the tests of the default, secure
behavior, because until the "allowed" versions work on Windows, it
will be unclear if either are using a payload that is effective and
that corresponds to the way its effect is examined. (Fortunately,
all are working on other OSes, and the affected code under test
does not appear highly dependent on OS, so the fix is *probably*
fully working on Windows as well.)
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/GitPython that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2023
The tests of unsafe options are among those introduced originally
in gitpython-developers#1521. They are regression tests for gitpython-developers#1515 (CVE-2022-24439).
The unsafe options tests are paired: a test for the usual, default
behavior of forbidding the option, and a test for the behavior when
the option is explicitly allowed. In each such pair, both tests use
a payload that is intended to produce the side effect of a file of
a specific name being created in a temporary directory.

All the tests work on Unix-like systems. On Windows, the tests of
the *allowed* cases are broken, and this commit marks them xfail.
However, this has implications for the tests of the default, secure
behavior, because until the "allowed" versions work on Windows, it
will be unclear if either are using a payload that is effective and
that corresponds to the way its effect is examined. (Fortunately,
all are working on other OSes, and the affected code under test
does not appear highly dependent on OS, so the fix is *probably*
fully working on Windows as well.)
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/GitPython that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2023
The tests of unsafe options are among those introduced originally
in gitpython-developers#1521. They are regression tests for gitpython-developers#1515 (CVE-2022-24439).
The unsafe options tests are paired: a test for the usual, default
behavior of forbidding the option, and a test for the behavior when
the option is explicitly allowed. In each such pair, both tests use
a payload that is intended to produce the side effect of a file of
a specific name being created in a temporary directory.

All the tests work on Unix-like systems. On Windows, the tests of
the *allowed* cases are broken, and this commit marks them xfail.
However, this has implications for the tests of the default, secure
behavior, because until the "allowed" versions work on Windows, it
will be unclear if either are using a payload that is effective and
that corresponds to the way its effect is examined.

Specifically, the "\" characters in the path seem to be treated as
escape characters rather than literally. Also, "touch" is not a
native Windows command, and the "touch" command in Git for Windows
maps disallowed occurrences of ":" in filenames to a separate code
point in the Private Use Area of the Basic Multilingual Plane.
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/GitPython that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2023
The tests of unsafe options are among those introduced originally
in gitpython-developers#1521. They are regression tests for gitpython-developers#1515 (CVE-2022-24439).
The unsafe options tests are paired: a test for the usual, default
behavior of forbidding the option, and a test for the behavior when
the option is explicitly allowed. In each such pair, both tests use
a payload that is intended to produce the side effect of a file of
a specific name being created in a temporary directory.

All the tests work on Unix-like systems. On Windows, the tests of
the *allowed* cases are broken, and this commit marks them xfail.
However, this has implications for the tests of the default, secure
behavior, because until the "allowed" versions work on Windows, it
will be unclear if either are using a payload that is effective and
that corresponds to the way its effect is examined.

What *seems* to happen is this: The "\" characters in the path are
treated as shell escape characters rather than literally, with the
effect of disappearing in most paths since most letters lack
special meaning when escaped. Also, "touch" is not a native Windows
command, and the "touch" command provided by Git for Windows is
linked against MSYS2 libraries, causing it to map (some?)
occurrences of ":" in filenames to a separate code point in the
Private Use Area of the Basic Multilingual Plane. The result is a
path with no directory separators or drive letter. It denotes a
file of an unintended name in the current directory, which is never
the intended location. The current directory depends on GitPython
implementation details, but at present it's the top-level directory
of the rw_repo working tree. A new unstaged file, named like
"C\357\200\272UsersekAppDataLocalTemptmpc7x4xik5pwn", can be
observed there (this is how "git status" will format the name).

Fortunately, this and all related tests are working on other OSes,
and the affected code under test does not appear highly dependent
on OS. So the fix is *probably* fully working on Windows as well.
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/GitPython that referenced this pull request Nov 24, 2023
The tests of unsafe options are among those introduced originally
in gitpython-developers#1521. They are regression tests for gitpython-developers#1515 (CVE-2022-24439).
The unsafe options tests are paired: a test for the usual, default
behavior of forbidding the option, and a test for the behavior when
the option is explicitly allowed. In each such pair, both tests use
a payload that is intended to produce the side effect of a file of
a specific name being created in a temporary directory.

All the tests work on Unix-like systems. On Windows, the tests of
the *allowed* cases are broken, and this commit marks them xfail.
However, this has implications for the tests of the default, secure
behavior, because until the "allowed" versions work on Windows, it
will be unclear if either are using a payload that is effective and
that corresponds to the way its effect is examined.

What *seems* to happen is this: The "\" characters in the path are
treated as shell escape characters rather than literally, with the
effect of disappearing in most paths since most letters lack
special meaning when escaped. Also, "touch" is not a native Windows
command, and the "touch" command provided by Git for Windows is
linked against MSYS2 libraries, causing it to map (some?)
occurrences of ":" in filenames to a separate code point in the
Private Use Area of the Basic Multilingual Plane. The result is a
path with no directory separators or drive letter. It denotes a
file of an unintended name in the current directory, which is never
the intended location. The current directory depends on GitPython
implementation details, but at present it's the top-level directory
of the rw_repo working tree. A new unstaged file, named like
"C\357\200\272UsersekAppDataLocalTemptmpc7x4xik5pwn", can be
observed there (this is how "git status" will format the name).

Fortunately, this and all related tests are working on other OSes,
and the affected code under test does not appear highly dependent
on OS. So the fix is *probably* fully working on Windows as well.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CVE-2022-24439: <gitpython::clone> 'ext::sh -c touch% /tmp/pwned' for remote code execution
3 participants