There's a cross-site scripting problem in gitweb, where it will print
URLs generated by its href() helper without further quoting. This allows
an attacker to point a victim to a specially crafted gitweb URL and
inject arbitrary HTML into the resulting page (which the victim sees as
coming from gitweb).
The base of the URL comes from evaluate_uri(), which pulls the value of
$REQUEST_URI via the CGI module. It tries to strip off $PATH_INFO, but
fails to do so in some cases (including ones that contain special
characters, like "+"). Most of the uses of the URL end up being passed
to "$cgi->a(-href = href())", which will get quoted properly by the CGI
module. But in a few places, we output them ourselves as part of
manually-generated HTML, and whatever was in the original URL will
appear unquoted in the output.
Given that all of the nearby variables placed into this manual HTML
_are_ quoted, it seems like the authors assumed that these URLs would
not need quoting. So it's possible that the bug is actually in
evaluate_uri(), which should be doing a more careful job of stripping
$PATH_INFO. There's some discussion in a comment in that function, as
well as the commit message in 81d3fe9f48 (gitweb: fix wrong base URL
when non-root DirectoryIndex, 2009-02-15). But I'm not sure I understand
it.
Regardless, it's a good idea to quote these values at the point of
insertion into the HTML output:
1. Even if there is a bug in evaluate_uri(), this would give us
belt-and-suspenders protection.
2. evaluate_uri() is only handling the base. Some generated URLs will
also mention arbitrary refs or filenames in the repositories, and
these should be quoted anyway.
3. It should never _hurt_ to quote (and that's what all of the
$cgi->a() calls are doing already).
So there may be further work here, but this patch at least prevents the
XSS vulnerability, and shouldn't make anything worse.
The test here covers the calls in print_feed_meta(), but I manually
audited every call to href() to see how its output was used, and quoted
appropriately. Most of them are esc_attr(), as they're used in tag
attributes, but I used esc_html() when the URLs were printed bare. The
distinction is largely academic, as one is implemented as a wrapper for
the other.
Reported-by: NAKAYAMA DAISUKE <nakyamad@icloud.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function is just a thin wrapper around gitweb_run(), which takes
multiple arguments. But we only pass along "$1". Let's pass everything
we get, which will let a future patch add an XSS test that affects
PATH_INFO (which gitweb_run() takes as $2).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This script misses a trivial &&-chain in one of its tests,
but it also has a weird reverse: it includes an &&-chain
outside of any test_expect block! This "cat" should never
fail, but if it did, we would not notice, as it would cause
us to skip the follow-on test entirely (which does not
appear intentional; there are many later tests which rely on
this cat).
Let's instead move the setup into its own test_expect_success
block, which is the standard practice nowadays.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The check_snapshot function makes sure that no cruft outside the
repository hierarchy is added to the tar archive. The output from
"tar tf" on the resulting archive is inspected to see if there is
anything that does not begin with "$prefix/".
There are two issues with this implementation:
- Traditional tar implemenations that do not understand
pax_global_header will write it out as if it is a plain file at
the top-level;
- Some implementations of tar do not add trailing slash when
showing a directory entry (i.e. the output line for the entire
archive will show "$prefix", not "$prefix/").
Fix them so that what we want to validate can be tested with
traditional tar implementations.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The title of an RSS feed is generated from many components,
including the filename provided as a query parameter, but we
failed to quote it. Besides showing the wrong output, this
is a vector for XSS attacks.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Extract filtering out forks (which is done if 'forks' feature is
enabled) into filter_forks_from_projects_list subroutine, and
searching projects (via projects search form, or via content tags)
into search_projects_list subroutine.
Both are now run _before_ displaying projects, and not while printing;
this allow to know upfront if there were any found projects. Gitweb
now can and do print 'No such projects found' if user searches for
phrase which does not correspond to any project (any repository).
This also would allow splitting projects list into pages, if we so
desire.
Filtering out forks and marking repository (project) as having forks
is now consolidated into one subroutine (special case of handling
forks in git_get_projects_list only for $projects_list being file is
now removed). Forks handling is also cleaned up and simplified.
$pr->{'forks'} now contains un-filled list of forks; we can now also
detect situation where the way for having forks is prepared, but there
are no forks yet.
Sorting projects got also refactored in a very straight way (just
moving code) into sort_projects_list subroutine.
The interaction between forks, content tags and searching is now made
more explicit: searching whether by tag, or via search form turns off
fork filtering (gitweb searches also forks, and will show all
results). If 'ctags' feature is disabled, then searching by tag is
too.
The t9500 test now includes some basic test for 'forks' and 'ctags'
features; the t9502 includes test checking if gitweb correctly filters
out forks.
Generating list of projects by scanning given directory is now also a
bit simplified wrt. handling filtering; it is byproduct of extracting
filtering forks to separate subroutine.
While at it we now detect that there are no projects and respond with
"404 No projects found" also for 'project_index' and 'opml' actions.
Helped-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Teach gitweb how to produce nicer snapshot names by only using the
short hash id. If clients make requests using a tree-ish that is not
a partial or full SHA-1 hash, then the short hash will also be appended
to whatever they asked for. If clients request snapshot of a tag
(which means that $hash ('h') parameter has 'refs/tags/' prefix),
use only tag name.
Update tests cases in t9502-gitweb-standalone-parse-output.
Gitweb uses the following format for snapshot filenames:
<sanitized project name>-<version info>.<snapshot suffix>
where <sanitized project name> is project name with '.git' or '/.git'
suffix stripped, unless '.git' is the whole project name. For
snapshot prefix it uses:
<sanitized project name>-<version info>/
as compared to <sanitized project name>/ before (without version info).
Current rules for <version info>:
* if 'h' / $hash parameter is SHA-1 or shortened SHA-1, use SHA-1
shortened to to 7 characters
* otherwise if 'h' / $hash parameter is tag name (it begins with
'refs/tags/' prefix, use tag name (with 'refs/tags/' stripped
* otherwise if 'h' / $hash parameter starts with 'refs/heads/' prefix,
strip this prefix, convert '/' into '.', and append shortened SHA-1
after '-', i.e. use <sanitized hash>-<shortened sha1>
Signed-off-by: Mark Rada <marada@uwaterloo.ca>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add t9502-gitweb-standalone-parse-output test script, which runs
gitweb as a CGI script from the commandline and checks that it
produces the correct output.
Currently this test script contains only tests of snapshot naming
(proposed name of snapshot file) and snapshot prefix (prefix of files
in the archive / snapshot). It defines and uses 'tar' snapshot
format, without compression, for easy checking of snapshot prefix.
Testing is done using check_snapshot function.
Gitweb uses the following format for snapshot filenames:
<sanitized project name>-<hash parameter><snapshot suffix>
where <sanitized project name> is project name with '.git' or '/.git'
suffix stripped, unless '.git' is the whole project name. For
snapshot prefix it uses simply:
<sanitized project name>/
Disadvantages of current snapshot rules:
* There exists convention that <basename>.<suffix> archive unpacks to
<basename>/ directory (<basename>/ is prefix of archive). Gitweb
does not respect it
* Snapshot links generated by gitweb use full SHA-1 id as a value of
'h' / $hash parameter. With current rules it leads to long file
names like e.g. repo-1005c80cc11c531d327b12195027cbbb4ff9e3cb.tgz
* For handcrafted URLs, where 'h' / $hash parameter is a symbolic
'volatile' revision name such as "HEAD" or "next" snapshot name
doesn't tell us what exact version it was created from
* Proposed filename in Content-Disposition header should not contain
any directory path information, which means that it should not
contain '/' (see RFC2183)... which means that snapshot naming is
broken for $hash being e.g. hirearchical branch name such as
'xx/test'
This would be improved in next commit.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
