emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Steven Allen <steven@stebalien.com>
To: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com>
Cc: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com>,
	Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net>,
	emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Bastien <bzg@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [POLL] We plan to remove #+LINK: ...%(my-function) placeholder from link abbreviation spec
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:01:22 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87msn5ovbx.fsf@stebalien.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874j9d3tjp.fsf@gmail.com>

Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com> writes:

> Steven Allen <steven@stebalien.com> writes:
>
>> 1. While this feature no longer invokes completely arbitrary code, it
>> still allows an attacker to call any function marked as "pure" which
>> is a pretty large attack surface.
>
> I am struggling to assess this, because it's not clear to me what the
> threat model is.  Could you please elaborate?  How are the attacker and
> potential victim interacting; what is the attack vector(s); who are the
> threat agents and what is their goal that we are trying to guard
> against, etc?

Scenario: Attacker sends an email containing an inline org-mode part with a
malicious link abbreviation.

The concern is that, e.g., there may b a function _marked_ as pure
that's not actually pure, leaks some information, and/or has a security
vulnerability (e.g., a C function exposed to lisp that's marked as pure
but internally has, e.g., a buffer overflow).

Of course, the actual attack hypothetical. The question being asked here
is: is the %(..) specifier in link abbreviations useful enough to warent
the potential risks.

>> You can, of course, write that function; but then you might as well
>> use org-link-abbrev-alist instead of defining a local #+LINK.
>
> Perhaps I misunderstood, I thought the thing being polled was whether or
> not to allow org-link-abbrev-alist to have REPLACE (per its docstring)
> be a function.  I.e., if %(my-function) is removed, so too would the
> ability to have a function in the REPLACE position in
> org-link-abbrev-alist.  Did I misunderstand?

The question is whether or not %(function) placeholders should be
allowed in #+LINK: lines. It doesn't actually say anything about
allowing them in the global org-link-abbrev-alist. But to be explicit,
there are three options:

1. Allow them in both #+LINK: lines and the global
org-link-abbrev-alist.

2. Allow them in org-link-abbrev-alist only.

3. Remove them entirely.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-06-28 17:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-22 16:10 [ANN] Emergency bugfix release: Org mode 9.7.5 Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-22 17:49 ` Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-22 23:55   ` Greg Troxel
2024-06-23  1:58     ` Steven Allen
2024-06-22 17:59 ` emacs-orgmode
2024-06-22 19:15   ` Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-24  9:09     ` Assigned: CVE-2024-39331 (was: [ANN] Emergency bugfix release: Org mode 9.7.5) Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-24  8:08 ` [ANN] Emergency bugfix release: Org mode 9.7.5 Bastien Guerry
2024-06-28 15:09 ` [POLL] We plan to remove #+LINK: ...%(my-function) placeholder from link abbreviation spec (was: [ANN] Emergency bugfix release: Org mode 9.7.5) Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-28 15:51   ` [POLL] We plan to remove #+LINK: ...%(my-function) placeholder from link abbreviation spec Suhail Singh
2024-06-28 16:20     ` Steven Allen
2024-06-28 16:45       ` Suhail Singh
2024-06-28 16:55         ` Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-28 17:34           ` Suhail Singh
2024-06-28 17:01         ` Steven Allen [this message]
2024-06-28 17:55           ` Suhail Singh
2024-06-28 18:16             ` Steven Allen
2024-06-28 15:23 ` [POLL] Bug of Feature? Attack vector via deceiving link abbrevs (was: [ANN] Emergency bugfix release: Org mode 9.7.5) Ihor Radchenko
2024-06-28 15:52   ` Steven Allen
2024-06-28 15:54   ` [POLL] Bug of Feature? Attack vector via deceiving link abbrevs Suhail Singh

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://www.orgmode.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87msn5ovbx.fsf@stebalien.com \
    --to=steven@stebalien.com \
    --cc=bzg@gnu.org \
    --cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
    --cc=suhailsingh247@gmail.com \
    --cc=yantar92@posteo.net \
    /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/emacs/org-mode.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).