git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] hooks: fix a TOCTOU in "did we run a hook?" heuristic

From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date
Feb 19, 2022, 10:46 UTC
Message-ID
<220219.861qzzdtg2.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<YhBtI6PY5s/nC8og@nand.local>
On Fri, Feb 18 2022, Taylor Blau wrote:
Show 40 quoted lines
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 09:43:52PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> diff --git a/builtin/commit.c b/builtin/commit.c
>> index b9ed0374e30..bc5d34bc31f 100644
>> --- a/builtin/commit.c
>> +++ b/builtin/commit.c
>> @@ -725,11 +725,13 @@ static int prepare_to_commit(const char *index_file, const char *prefix,
>>  	int clean_message_contents = (cleanup_mode != COMMIT_MSG_CLEANUP_NONE);
>>  	int old_display_comment_prefix;
>>  	int merge_contains_scissors = 0;
>> +	int invoked_hook;
>>
>>  	/* This checks and barfs if author is badly specified */
>>  	determine_author_info(author_ident);
>>
>> -	if (!no_verify && run_commit_hook(use_editor, index_file, "pre-commit", NULL))
>> +	if (!no_verify && run_commit_hook(use_editor, index_file, &invoked_hook,
>> +					  "pre-commit", NULL))
>>  		return 0;
>>
>>  	if (squash_message) {
>> @@ -1052,10 +1054,10 @@ static int prepare_to_commit(const char *index_file, const char *prefix,
>>  		return 0;
>>  	}
>>
>> -	if (!no_verify && hook_exists("pre-commit")) {
>> +	if (!no_verify && invoked_hook) {
>>  		/*
>> -		 * Re-read the index as pre-commit hook could have updated it,
>> -		 * and write it out as a tree.  We must do this before we invoke
>> +		 * Re-read the index as the pre-commit-commit hook was invoked
>> +		 * and could have updated it. We must do this before we invoke
>>  		 * the editor and after we invoke run_status above.
>>  		 */
>>  		discard_cache();
>
> Sanity checking my own understating of this race: if we ran the
> pre-commit hook and it modified the index, but hook_exists() returns
> false later on (e.g., because the hook itself went away, the directory
> became unreadable, etc.), then we won't call discard_cache() when we
> should have?
Yes, it's that obscure.
Show 5 quoted lines
> If so, OK. This definitely seems like a pretty niche race, but
> independent of that I think the change here is an improvement in
> readability, and makes it clearer that calling discard_cache() depends
> on whether or not we *ran* the pre-commit hook, not whether we (still)
> *have* a pre-commit hook.

Yeah, that's the main reason to do it. I found this really hard to follow before, why didn't we just remember if we have/ran the thing? Now we do.

Previous: Taylor BlauNext: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
Message 8 of 12 in “hooks: fix a race in hook execution”
  1. 0/2 hooks: fix a race in hook executionÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Feb 18, 2022
  2. 1/2 merge: don't run post-hook logic on --no-verifyÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Feb 18, 2022
  3. Junio C HamanoFeb 18, 2022
  4. 2/2 hooks: fix a TOCTOU in "did we run a hook?" heuristicÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Feb 18, 2022
  5. Junio C HamanoFeb 19, 2022
  6. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonFeb 19, 2022
  7. Taylor BlauFeb 19, 2022
  8. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonFeb 19, 2022
  9. 0/2 hooks: fix a race in hook executionÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Mar 7, 2022
  10. 1/2 merge: don't run post-hook logic on --no-verifyÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Mar 7, 2022
  11. 2/2 hooks: fix an obscure TOCTOU "did we just run a hook?" raceÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Mar 7, 2022
  12. Jonathan TanMar 21, 2022

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.