From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>, guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Needed: tooling to detect references to buggy */stable packages (was: Re: [PATCHES] ImageMagick security updates without grafting)
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 08:54:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d8fdc44cf956c4ac450c9d2713e9be4cfce5757.camel@telenet.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zgymdi2n.fsf@netris.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3691 bytes --]
On Sun, 2021-03-28 at 18:33 -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Earlier, I wrote:
> > One thing to be very careful about is to only use 'gtk-doc/stable',
> > 'dblatex/stable', and 'imagemagick/stable' in native-inputs, and
> > moreover to make sure that no references to these */stable packages
> > remain in any package outputs.
> >
> > Of course, if any package retains references to its 'native-inputs',
> > that's always a bug, but I wouldn't be surprised if such bugs exist in
> > Guix. Such bugs might be relatively harmless now (except when
> > cross-compiling), but they could become a security bug if a package
> > retains a reference to 'imagemagick/stable'.
It just occurred to me: could we automatically add all native-inputs
to #:disallowed-references when cross-compiling? This shouldn't break
any packages, except possibly when cross-compiling.
Or stronger, add all native-inputs to #:disallowed-references (unless
they are also in inputs or propagated-inputs), even when compiling
natively?
Problems include:
* I guess a world rebuild, as the derivations would be different.
* In some places we have the following pattern:
(native-inputs
`(("autoconf" ,autoconf)
("automake" ,automake)
("pkg-config" ,pkg-config)
,@(if (%current-target-system)
`(("guile" ,guile-3.0)) ;for 'guild compile' and 'guile-3.0.pc'
'())))
(inputs
`(("guile" ,guile-3.0)
("lzlib" ,lzlib)))
(synopsis "Guile bindings to lzlib")
The (if (%current-target-system) ...) would need to be made unconditional.
* I guess an option to disable this behaviour might be useful.
> It occurs to me that we will need some tooling to ensure that no
> references to these buggy "*/stable" packages end up in package outputs
> that users actually use. Otherwise, it is likely that sooner or later,
> a runtime reference to one of these buggy packages will sneak in to our
> systems.
>
> An initial idea is that these "*/stable" packages could have a package
> property (perhaps named something like 'build-time-only') that indicates
> that references to its outputs should not occur within the outputs of
> any other package that does not have that same property.
Would this be (a) something enforced by the build process (using
#:disallowed-references or #:allowed-references), or (b) a linter?
> We'd also need to somehow ensure that users don't install these
> 'build-time-only' packages directly, at least not without an additional
> option (e.g. --force-unsafe-build-time-only) to override it.
What about a developer running "guix environment eom"? IIUC, this would
make the developer vulnerable (at least, once I've gotten around replacing
the 'gtk-doc' input with 'gtk-doc/stable'), so it might make sense to
replace /stable -> unstable packages here.
However, now the developer ends up with a different set of packages than
wil be seen in the build environment ...
> Additionally, it might be good to issue warnings if 'build-time-only'
> packages are not hidden,
This seems good to me. This should prevent
"guix install imagemagick@bad-version".
> or if they are found within the 'inputs' or
> 'propagated-inputs' fields of any package that's not also
> 'build-time-only'. Both of these last two checks have loopholes,
> however, so they are not reliable indicators.
But these (automatic "guix lint") checks could still catch many
problems in practice before they are committed!
> Thoughts? Other proposals?
Is this something you will be writing "guix lint" checkers (or other
checkers) for yourself?
Greetings,
Maxime.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-29 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-27 13:09 [PATCHES] ImageMagick security updates without grafting Mark H Weaver
2021-03-27 14:36 ` Maxime Devos
2021-03-28 0:01 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-03-28 9:59 ` Maxime Devos
2021-03-28 21:37 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-03-28 22:05 ` Maxime Devos
2021-03-29 21:28 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-03-30 22:23 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-03-28 22:33 ` Needed: tooling to detect references to buggy */stable packages (was: Re: [PATCHES] ImageMagick security updates without grafting) Mark H Weaver
2021-03-29 6:54 ` Maxime Devos [this message]
2021-04-04 20:14 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-04-05 9:53 ` Maxime Devos
2021-03-29 12:43 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2021-03-30 10:39 ` Needed: tooling to detect references to buggy */stable packages Ludovic Courtès
2021-04-04 19:54 ` Mark H Weaver
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6d8fdc44cf956c4ac450c9d2713e9be4cfce5757.camel@telenet.be \
--to=maximedevos@telenet.be \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mhw@netris.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).