Skip to content
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

doc,test: add known path resolution issue in permission model #49155

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 31, 2023
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions doc/api/permissions.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -560,6 +560,8 @@ Wildcards are supported too:

There are constraints you need to know before using this system:

* When the permission model is enabled, Node.js may resolve some paths
differently than when it is disabled.
* Native modules are restricted by default when using the Permission Model.
* OpenSSL engines currently cannot be requested at runtime when the Permission
Model is enabled, affecting the built-in crypto, https, and tls modules.
Expand Down
46 changes: 46 additions & 0 deletions test/known_issues/test-permission-model-path-resolution.js
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
'use strict';

// The permission model resolves paths to avoid path traversals, but in doing so
// it potentially interprets paths differently than the operating system would.
// This test demonstrates that merely enabling the permission model causes the
// application to potentially access a different file than it would without the
// permission model.

const common = require('../common');

const assert = require('assert');
const { execFileSync } = require('child_process');
const { mkdirSync, symlinkSync, writeFileSync } = require('fs');
const path = require('path');

if (common.isWindows)
assert.fail('not applicable to Windows');

const tmpdir = require('../common/tmpdir');
tmpdir.refresh();

const a = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'a');
const b = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'b');
const c = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'c');
const d = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'c/d');

writeFileSync(a, 'bad');
symlinkSync('c/d', b);
mkdirSync(c);
mkdirSync(d);
writeFileSync(path.join(c, 'a'), 'good');

function run(...args) {
const interestingPath = `${tmpdir.path}/b/../a`;
args = [...args, '-p', `fs.readFileSync(${JSON.stringify(interestingPath)}, 'utf8')`];
return execFileSync(process.execPath, args, { encoding: 'utf8' }).trim();
}

// Because this is a known_issues test, we cannot assert any assumptions besides
// the known issue itself. Instead, do a sanity check and report success if the
// sanity check fails.
if (run() !== 'good') {
process.exit(0);
}

assert.strictEqual(run('--experimental-permission', `--allow-fs-read=${tmpdir.path}`), 'good');