Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75933 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 92214 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2014 08:58:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Jul 2014 08:58:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=julienpauli@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=julienpauli@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.177 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.220.177 mail-vc0-f177.google.com Received: from [209.85.220.177] ([209.85.220.177:36378] helo=mail-vc0-f177.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 59/B2-21666-B297FC35 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 04:58:19 -0400 Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id hy4so1566422vcb.36 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 01:58:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=njIkk3YTL55LKE9CuTJjhKWNY0+LDqp+/slXWyY/Bks=; b=CLguSQ4JZAP/Q2cNaa6FT/PG5os+Xl0Y+EGSCYeNniqvsiqE0j0rnKhTRDcWubJ567 xvi7UsIzIWgM31ZKmPes2LJutM0zq+5dDJouffGH5JwQtEDRAeBtSSJtaSlZxVEZlayr n37dUXxK6+qxTVPGCfMHGu2wLdWxI4X87dcU4Xe7V583olvaW7gP1o0FpruOjs2dIwTJ 8YF/w4KQ6vlxkiC6rxZCyMvpa7TZlZ3JLdzsstpN8xMeSVYskhEJTtboGNWYQvBzJVKc zW1r7ohcR4gRPqRVJCI89GZtKwb+KvohEfCJoZ6I5l/U2v1Kgqhjtk13D/rv5jSy7irF XWYA== X-Received: by 10.52.12.229 with SMTP id b5mr30630430vdc.52.1406105898493; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 01:58:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.81.68 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 01:57:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53A1C722.9060501@fedoraproject.org> <53A21137.6010705@sugarcrm.com> <53A2A9BD.1070603@sugarcrm.com> <53A3874E.20704@sugarcrm.com> <53A62AFF.4080302@sugarcrm.com> <53B10D59.4060206@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:57:38 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: z6cAh5FBK1IeqLMXBedTlMwAWIU Message-ID: To: Ferenc Kovacs Cc: Nikita Popov , Alexey Zakhlestin , Stas Malyshev , Marco Pivetta , Sebastian Bergmann , Remi Collet , PHP Internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Problems with the fix for the BC break introduced in 5.4.29 and 5.5.13 From: jpauli@php.net (Julien Pauli) On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Julien Pauli wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Nikita Popov >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Ferenc Kovacs >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> sorry for the late reply. >> >>> you are right and after looking into the implementation I think >> >>> classes >> >>> having custom object storage (eg. create_object) shouldn't assume that >> >>> their __construct will be called, but either do the initialization in >> >>> the >> >>> create_object hook or validate in the other methods that the object >> >>> was >> >>> properly initialized. >> >>> given that this lack of initialization problem is already present(you >> >>> can >> >>> extend such a class and have a __construct() in the subclass which >> >>> doesn't >> >>> call the parent constructor), and we want to keep the unserialize >> >>> trick >> >>> fixed (as that exposes this problems to the remote attacker when some >> >>> code >> >>> accepts arbitrary serialized data from the client) I see no reason to >> >>> keep >> >>> the limitation in the ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() >> >>> and >> >>> allowing the instantiation of internal classes will provide a clean >> >>> upgrade >> >>> path to doctrine and co. >> >>> ofc. we have to fix the internal classes misusing the constructor for >> >>> proper initialization one by one, but that can happen after the >> >>> initial >> >>> 5.6.0 release (ofc it would be wonderful if people could lend me a >> >>> hand >> >>> for >> >>> fixing as much as we can before the release), but we have to fix those >> >>> anyways. >> >> >> >> >> >> This sounds reasonable to me. newInstanceWithoutConstructor does not >> >> have >> >> the same remote exploitation concerns as serialize, so allowing crashes >> >> here >> >> that can also be caused by other means seems okay to me (especially if >> >> we're >> >> planning to fix them lateron). Only additional restriction I'd add is >> >> to >> >> disallow calling it on an internal + final class. For those the >> >> __construct >> >> argument does not apply. For them the entity-extending-internal-class >> >> usecase doesn't apply either, so that shouldn't be a problem. >> >> >> >> Nikita >> >> >> > >> > Thanks for the prompt reply! >> > I was considering mentioning the final constructors, but as we >> > previously >> > didn't checked that and from a quick look it seems that we are mostly >> > using >> > it as an easy/cheap way to make sure that the object is initialized >> > properly >> > (which could also happen when a subclass calls parent::__construct() >> > from >> > it's constructor) which isn't exactly the best usecase for final. >> > But I don't really mind having that check. >> >> I'm +1 also with the idea. >> >> Just take care to have a clone_handler defined as well, as the default >> clone handler doesn't call create_object. >> http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_5_5/Zend/zend_objects.c#218 >> >> Julien > > > thanks, I will keep that in mind when we start moving the initialization > from the constructors into the create_object functions. > I've also went ahead and created a pull request for the proposed changes: > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/733 > as you can see I've taken Nikita's advice and internal classes with final > constructors are still not allowed to be instantiated. When should we start patching those ? I guess asap ? Julien