Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14567

Re: History of bash's support for self-modifying shell scripts?

Path csiph.com!xmission!news.snarked.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
Newsgroups gnu.bash.bug
Subject Re: History of bash's support for self-modifying shell scripts?
Date Mon, 10 Sep 2018 16:50:29 -0400
Lines 45
Approved bug-bash@gnu.org
Message-ID <mailman.614.1536613603.1284.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
References <20180910052543.GA4482@localhost>
Reply-To chet.ramey@case.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host lists.gnu.org
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace usenet.stanford.edu 1536613604 26127 208.118.235.17 (10 Sep 2018 21:06:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To action@cs.stanford.edu
Cc chet.ramey@case.edu
To Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>, bug-bash@gnu.org
Envelope-to bug-bash@gnu.org
Openpgp preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt addr=chet.ramey@case.edu; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsDiBEEOsGwRBACFa0A1oa71HSZLWxAx0svXzhOZNQZOzqHmSuGOG92jIpQpr8DpvgRh40Yp AwdcXb8QG1J5yGAKeevNE1zCFaA725vGSdHUyypHouV0xoWwukYO6qlyyX+2BZU+okBUqoWQ koWxiYaCSfzB2Ln7pmdys1fJhcgBKf3VjWCjd2XJTwCgoFJOwyBFJdugjfwjSoRSwDOIMf0D /iQKqlWhIO1LGpMrGX0il0/x4zj0NAcSwAk7LaPZbN4UPjn5pqGEHBlf1+xDDQCkAoZ/VqES GZragl4VqJfxBr29Ag0UDvNbUbXoxQsARdero1M8GiAIRc50hj7HXFoERwenbNDJL86GPLAQ OTGOCa4W2o29nFfFjQrsrrYHzVtyA/9oyKvTeEMJ7NA3VJdWcmn7gOu0FxEmSNhSoV1T4vP2 1Wf7f5niCCRKQLNyUy0wEApQi4tSysdz+AbgAc0b/bHYVzIf2uO2lIEZQNNt+3g2bmXgloWm W5fsm/di50Gm1l1Na63d3RZ00SeFQos6WEwLUHEB0yp6KXluXLLIZitEJM0gQ2hldCBSYW1l eSA8Y2hldC5yYW1leUBjYXNlLmVkdT7CYQQTEQIAIQIbAwYLCQgHAwIDFQIDAxYCAQIeAQIX gAUCRX3FIgIZAQAKCRC7WGnwZOp0q069AKCNDRn+zzN/AHbaynls/Lvq1kH/RQCgkLvF8bDs maUHSxSIPqzlGuKWDxbOwE0EQQ6wbxAEAJCukwDigRDPhAuI+lf+6P64lWanIFOXIndqhvU1 3cDbQ/Wt5LwPzm2QTvd7F+fcHOgZ8KOFScbDpjJaRqwIybMTcIN0B2pBLX/C10W1aY+cUrXZ gXUGVISEMmpaP9v02auToo7XXVEHC+XLO9IU7/xaU98FL69l6/K4xeNSBRM/AAMHA/wNAmRB pcyK0+VggZ5esQaIP/LyolAm2qwcmrd3dZi+g24s7yjV0EUwvRP7xHRDQFgkAo6++QbuecU/ J90lxrVnQwucZmfz9zgWDkT/MpfB/CNRSKLFjhYq2yHmHWT6vEjw9Ry/hF6Pc0oh1a62USdf aKAiim0nVxxQmPmiRvtCmcJJBBgRAgAJBQJBDrBvAhsMAAoJELtYafBk6nSr43AAn2ZZFQg8 Gs/zUzvXMt7evaFqVTzcAJ0cHtKpP1i/4H4R9+OsYeQdxxWxTQ==
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
In-Reply-To <20180910052543.GA4482@localhost>
Content-Language en-US
X-Junkmail-Status score=7/90, host=mpv3-2015.case.edu
X-Junkmail-PrAS-Raw score=7/90, refid=2.7.2:2018.9.10.195116:17:7.944, ip=, rules=__HAS_REPLYTO, __HAS_CC_HDR, __PHISH_SPEAR_SUBJ_TEAM, __SUBJ_REPLY, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NAME, __TO_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC, __REFERENCES, __HAS_FROM, FROM_EDU_TLD, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, DATE_TZ_NA, __USER_AGENT, __MOZILLA_USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __IN_REP_TO, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_ADDY, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_ACC, __FROM_DOMAIN_IN_ANY_CC1, __FROM_DOMAIN_IN_ANY_CC2, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_DOMAIN, __ANY_URI, __URI_WITH_PATH, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_NAME_BODY, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, __URI_IN_BODY, __URI_NOT_IMG, __FORWARDED_MSG, __NO_HTML_TAG_RAW, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_2000_2999, __MIME_TEXT_P1, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, __URI_NS, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, IN_REP_TO, MSG_THREAD, __FROM_DOMAIN_IN_RCPT, __TO_REAL_NAMES, [TRUNCATED], so=2010-03-03 19:42:08, dmn=2016-08-03-0138
X-detected-operating-system by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic]
X-Received-From 129.22.103.194
X-BeenThere bug-bash@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.21
Precedence list
List-Id Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell <bug-bash.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/>
List-Post <mailto:bug-bash@gnu.org>
List-Help <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Xref csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:14567

Show key headers only | View raw


On 9/10/18 1:25 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> While digging into the details of how bash reads shell scripts, I found
> some indications that bash goes out of its way to support self-modifying
> shell scripts. As far as I can tell, after reading and executing each
> command, bash will seek backward and re-read the script from the
> byte after the end of that command, rather than executing out of
> buffered data previously read from the file. (For the purposes of this
> logic, compound commands get run as a single unit, and this logic kicks
> in after running the full compound command.)

It happens in only a few cases: 1) when forking a child to run a command;
2) when a redirection specifies the same file descriptor as bash is using
to read a script; and 3) when bash is reading a script from stdin and the
read builtin is used to read from that file descriptor.

The first case is probably the one you're interested in. It's been there
even since I wrote the buffered input code in 1992, and it's more about
making sure parent and child shells have a consistent view of the script
in case the child expects to read from it. It's about being careful, not
explicitly allowing self-modifying scripts.

Previous versions of the shell (through bash-1.12) used stdio, which has
behavior that varies across systems, especially across parent-child
boundaries and changing file descriptors due to redirection (which it can't
really handle at all).

POSIX says you have to do that anyway if the shell is reading from stdin:

"When the shell is using standard input and it invokes a command that also
uses standard input, the shell shall ensure that the standard input file
pointer points directly after the command it has read when the command
begins execution. It shall not read ahead in such a manner that any
characters intended to be read by the invoked command are consumed by the
shell (whether interpreted by the shell or not) or that characters that are
not read by the invoked command are not seen by the shell."

But it probably isn't needed in the general case. Why not take the code out
and see what happens with your testing?

Chet
-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: History of bash's support for self-modifying shell scripts? Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> - 2018-09-10 16:50 -0400

csiph-web