-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
fix(sandbox): remove a symlink itself in UnixLocal rm, not its target #4830
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
Open
coderdailyone
wants to merge
4
commits into
openai:main
Choose a base branch
from
coderdailyone:fix/unix-local-rm-symlink
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6ff8a29
fix(sandbox): remove a symlink itself in UnixLocal rm, not its target
e505c43
fix(sandbox): validate raw rm paths before splitting off the leaf
3509f30
fix(sandbox): validate the rm leaf through the workspace path policy
2bf051c
fix(sandbox): address the workspace root through its resolved form in…
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When
user=names a non-owner removing a symlink from a sticky world-writable directory,_RM_ACCESS_CHECK_SCRIPTsucceeds because it checks only parent write/execute permission, even though an actualrmas that user is rejected by the sticky bit. The subsequentnormalized.unlink()runs as the SDK process and therefore deletes an entry the requested user cannot remove; execute the removal under the requested identity or extend the check to enforce sticky-directory ownership.Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is pre-existing behavior of the user-scoped path rather than something this change introduces: before this PR,
rm("file", user=...)ran the same_RM_ACCESS_CHECK_SCRIPTagainst the same parent directory and then unlinked as the SDK process, so a non-owner in a sticky world-writable directory was already able to remove another user's regular file. The only difference now is that the check and the unlink target the symlink entry instead of its resolved target, which is the intendedrmsemantics.I'd like to keep this PR scoped to the symlink-target bug. Enforcing sticky-directory ownership in the access check (or performing the removal under the requested identity) affects every user-scoped
rm, not just symlinks, and is hard to exercise in the test suite because CI does not run as a second uid. Happy to send it as a follow-up PR if maintainers want it.