[SSSD] [sssd][patch] SYSDB: sysdb_getnetgr returns ENOENT
Lukas Slebodnik
lslebodn at redhat.com
Thu Aug 28 13:50:57 UTC 2014
On (28/08/14 09:48), Simo Sorce wrote:
>On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 10:31 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (11/07/14 17:28), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>> >On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 10:51 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 2014-06-24 at 17:28 +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>> >> > > Error: PW.NON_CONST_PRINTF_FORMAT_STRING:
>> >> > > sssd-1.11.92/src/db/sysdb_ops.c:109: non_const_printf_format_string:
>> >> > format string is not a string literal, potential security
>> >> > vulnerability if user controlled
>> >> > > sssd-1.11.92/src/db/sysdb_ops.c:109: caretline:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I prefer to avoid compiler warnings. It will be better to use NULL.
>> >> >
>> >> > (lret = ldb_search(ldb, mem_ctx, _result, base, scope, attrs, NULL);)
>> >> >
>> >> > It's a common practice in SSSD anyway.
>> >>
>> >> Wouldn't it be simpler to use a macro in this case ?
>> >> Your new fuinction hjas to go through variadic expansion prematurely,
>> >> and adds a lot of code:
>> >>
>> >> something like:
>> >> #define sss_ldbn_seartch(ret, arguments, etc., format, ...) {
>> >> do {
>> >> int result = ldb_search(argumets, etc, format, ##__VA_ARGS__);
>> >> ret = result;
>> >> if (res->count == 0) {
>> >> ret = ENOENT;
>> >> }
>> >> } while(0);
>> >>
>> >>
>> >Hello,
>> >
>> >sorry for late reply. I guess your approach will definitely save some
>> >lines of code and some CPU cycles.
>> >
>> >I just must get used to the idea that macros are not considered evil in
>> >out environment. :-)
>> >
>> >Please see attached patch.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >
>> >Pavel Reichl
>> >
>>
>> >From d1293b63adcab4298228af225f3af5803759d34b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> >From: Pavel Reichl <preichl at redhat.com>
>> >Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 15:21:59 +0100
>> >Subject: [PATCH] SYSDB: SSS_LDB_SEARCH - macro around ldb_search
>> >
>> >This patch amends previous patch 5153e8b9793dea1e212ca08af0f77ea1d023cbb7.
>> >
>> >Macro SSS_LDB_SEARCH is used instead of using fuction sss_ldb_search as
>> >a wrapper around ldb_search which could lead to premature expansion of
>> >variadic parameters.
>> >
>> >Part of solution for:
>> >https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1991
>> >---
>> > src/db/sysdb.h | 19 +++++++++++++-----
>> > src/db/sysdb_ops.c | 51 -------------------------------------------------
>> > src/db/sysdb_search.c | 10 +++++-----
>> > src/tests/sysdb-tests.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
>> > 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-)
>> >
>> >diff --git a/src/db/sysdb.h b/src/db/sysdb.h
>> >index 17cd5110c9bdafd8d7b18e621188523ed41e5c8a..a613c84ffa9e4ab6ebdc930a8c4876e69aa3cd13 100644
>> >--- a/src/db/sysdb.h
>> >+++ b/src/db/sysdb.h
>> >@@ -481,11 +481,6 @@ int sysdb_get_netgroup_attr(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx,
>> > const char **attributes,
>> > struct ldb_result **res);
>> >
>> >-errno_t sss_ldb_search(struct ldb_context *ldb, TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx,
>> >- struct ldb_result **_result, struct ldb_dn *base,
>> >- enum ldb_scope scope, const char * const *attrs,
>> >- const char *exp_fmt, ...) SSS_ATTRIBUTE_PRINTF(7, 8);
>> >-
>> > /* functions that modify the databse
>> > * they have to be called within a transaction
>> > * See sysdb_transaction_send()/_recv() */
>> >@@ -864,4 +859,18 @@ errno_t sysdb_search_object_by_sid(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx,
>> > const char *sid_str,
>> > const char **attrs,
>> > struct ldb_result **msg);
>> >+
>> >+#define SSS_LDB_SEARCH(ret, ldb, mem_ctx, _result, base, scope, attrs, \
>> >+ exp_fmt, ...) \
>> >+{ \
>> >+ int lret; \
>> >+ \
>> >+ lret = ldb_search(ldb, mem_ctx, _result, base, scope, attrs, exp_fmt, \
>> >+ ##__VA_ARGS__); \
>> >+ ret = sysdb_error_to_errno(lret); \
>> >+ if (ret == EOK && (*_result)->count == 0) { \
>> >+ ret = ENOENT; \
>> >+ } \
>> >+} while(0)
>>
>> Use do { } while(0); for macro, not just { } while(0)
>>
>> @see macros SYSDB_VERSION_LOWER_ERROR, SYSDB_VERSION_HIGHER_ERROR,
>> DEBUG_PAM_DATA ...
>>
>> Otherwise patch LGTM. If there are no other objections to this version I will
>> give ACK.
>
>Sorry to come late, but why a macro and not just a function (possibly
>inlined but doesn't seem necessary to me) ?
>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/2014-June/020338.html
LS
More information about the sssd-devel
mailing list