[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr? |
Date: |
Sat, 25 May 2019 13:24:39 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-145-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) |
Florian Weimer wrote in
<https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2019-05/msg00087.html>:
> The relevant case is where there is no error, and we do not call _exit.
> I'm worried that the current implementation introduces a use-after-free
> bug under certain, quite reasonable circumstances. All that is needed
> is a shared object that tries to log something to stderr from an ELF
> destructor. I don't think that's something that can be ruled out, or
> can be assumed to happen in development environments only.
OK, now you have described the problem in an understandable way.
Let me rephrase the dilemma:
1) POSIX guarantees that we can detect write errors [up to the file
system layer of the kernel - I'm not worried about I/O errors on
the actual device] through fclose(), and kernels implement this.
Neither POSIX nor Linux guarantees that we can detect write errors
without calling fclose().
2) POSIX says "After the call to fclose(), any use of stream results in
undefined behavior." [1]
So, we need to call fclose(stderr) at a moment when we know that stderr
will not be used any more.
We have
* applications (like the coreutils programs), and
* environments which can modify the behaviour of these applications,
like shared objects added through LD_PRELOAD, or sanitizers [2].
The solution I would propose is to
- By default, assume that the environment does not modify the behaviour
of the application. That is, that the application executes its code
and nothing more.
- Let the environment tell the application (through an environment
variable) that it is modifying its behaviour.
For the first case, the current 'closeout' module is perfect.
For the other case, we can introduce, next to the !SANITIZE_ADDRESS test,
tests for
getenv ("LD_PRELOAD") != NULL
getenv ("ASAN_OPTIONS") != NULL
getenv ("TSAN_OPTIONS") != NULL
getenv ("MSAN_OPTIONS") != NULL
getenv ("LSAN_OPTIONS") != NULL
We can add more such environment variables as needed. getenv() lookups
don't make system calls; so they are cheap.
Bruno
[1] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/fclose.html
[2] https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/SanitizerCommonFlags
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, (continued)
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Florian Weimer, 2019/05/09
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Bernhard Voelker, 2019/05/09
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Paul Eggert, 2019/05/09
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Kamil Dudka, 2019/05/10
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Florian Weimer, 2019/05/10
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Paul Eggert, 2019/05/12
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Florian Weimer, 2019/05/13
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Paul Eggert, 2019/05/24
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Bruno Haible, 2019/05/25
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Florian Weimer, 2019/05/27
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Paul Eggert, 2019/05/25
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Florian Weimer, 2019/05/27
- Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Bruno Haible, 2019/05/27
Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Paul Eggert, 2019/05/06
Re: Why does close_stdout close stdout and stderr?, Bruno Haible, 2019/05/06