From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#37656: 27.0.50; Arbitrary code execution with special `mode:' Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 10:57:03 +0300 Message-ID: <83a7a1f7hs.fsf@gnu.org> References: Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="20357"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 37656@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se To: Adam Plaice Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 16 09:58:19 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeCI-0005Ax-Tt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:58:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38646 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeCH-0006rX-JM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:58:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41926) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeC4-0006or-TQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:58:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeC2-00066L-Oq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:58:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36350) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeC2-00066G-Hc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:58:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeC2-0006tb-FV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:58:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 07:58:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37656 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: security Original-Received: via spool by 37656-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37656.157121264926465 (code B ref 37656); Wed, 16 Oct 2019 07:58:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 37656) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Oct 2019 07:57:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45171 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeBU-0006sn-PI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:57:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:32770) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeBT-0006sZ-3U for 37656@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:57:27 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37323) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeBN-0005zQ-Rx; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:57:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3879 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iKeBM-0005Ne-I7; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:57:21 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Adam Plaice on Wed, 16 Oct 2019 02:35:58 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:169422 Archived-At: > From: Adam Plaice > Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 02:35:58 +0200 > Cc: 37656@debbugs.gnu.org, Emacs developers > > Unfortunately, I've realised that a similar problem can be introduced > with directory variables. Indeed, and I expect the same problem to pop up in other places. Which is why I think the problem should be solved in those modes which allow execution of arbitrary code via file-local variables without any security precautions or other limitations, at least under user control. > (Should I file separate bug for this as it's closely related but not > quite the same?) No, it's the same problem, and I don't like the proposed solution for the reasons explained above. I think we need a different solution.