-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
Java: File
constructor path sanitizer
#18504
Open
jcogs33
wants to merge
6
commits into
github:main
Choose a base branch
from
jcogs33:jcogs33/java/file-constructor-path-sanitizer
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and old review comments may become outdated.
+223
−8
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
59d4547
Java: add FileConstructorSanitizer and tests
60cc16c
Java: change note
4a4585a
Java: move comment
e8724ab
Java: sanitize constructor call instead and update test cases
bd47dcc
Java: check first arg for taint
d21c8d7
Java: restrict sink to first arg of two-arg constructor call
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
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions
4
java/ql/lib/change-notes/2025-01-16-file-constructor-sanitizer.md
This file contains 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ | ||
--- | ||
category: minorAnalysis | ||
--- | ||
* Added a path injection sanitizer for the `child` argument of a `java.io.File` constructor if that argument does not contain path traversal sequences. |
This file contains 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 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.
This is fine for testing, but we shouldn't commit this. I'm sure we can find some other solution, like adding a model to the inlineflowtest so that
source
is a remote flow source.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.
Can you clarify what you mean by "adding a model to the inlineflowtest"? I was thinking of using an actual
ActiveThreatModelSource
in this test case instead of(File) source();
. Is that what you mean? Or did you have something else in mind?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.
I meant you could add a model for
source
as a remote flow source that applies just to this test (if the test isx.ql
then the model has to be in a file calledx.ext.yml
in the same folder). That way the inline flow test can use its way of finding sources (calls to "source") and this flow config can use its way (active threat model). An alternative approach is to change the test to useActiveThreatModel
for its sources, which I think is what you were suggesting. Both are fine.