fix(win): use-after-free from unsynchronized access to ptyhandles#922
Merged
Conversation
The windows backend keeps a global vector of `ptyHandles`. Since the cleanup of the baton was moved into the per-pty watcher thread (commit 17062cd): - The watcher thread called `remove_pty_baton` without any lock, racing with other watchers and with JS-thread reads. - `emplace_back` in `startProcess` could reallocate the vector while another thread was iterating it.
alexr00
approved these changes
May 13, 2026
This was referenced May 13, 2026
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The windows backend keeps a global storage of
ptyHandles. Since commit 17062cd that moved the ownership of the handles to the global containerremove_pty_batonwithout any lock, racing with other watchers and with JS-thread reads.emplace_backinstartProcesscould reallocate the vector while another thread was iterating it.Fixes #921