Re: is_absolute_path incorrect on Windows
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-02-04T21:53:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- /rtmp/libpq.diff (text/x-diff) patch
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > >>> I have reviewed is_absolute_path() and have implemented > >>> path_is_relative_and_below_cwd() to cleanly handle cases like 'E:abc' on > >>> Win32; patch attached. > >> > >> This patch appears to remove some security-critical restrictions. > >> Why did you delete the path_contains_parent_reference calls? > > > They are now in path_is_relative_and_below_cwd(), > > ... and thus not invoked in the absolute-path case. This is a security > hole. > > > I don't see a general reason to prevent > > ".." in absolute paths, only relative ones. > > load '/path/to/database/../../../path/to/anywhere' Ah, good point. I was thinking about someone using ".." in the part of the path that is compared to /data or /log, but using it after that would clearly be a security problem. I have attached an updated patch that restructures the code to be clearer and adds the needed checks. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +