From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id CAROCrrsfmZIXwEAe85BDQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:02:50 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS id CAROCrrsfmZIXwEAe85BDQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:02:50 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=stebalien.com header.s=fm1 header.b="c Llg7Sp"; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=fbffVRAk; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=stebalien.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1719594170; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=DG/HY3//TYichMASveJzj7CTu1l5wst9ZXyg/pHIJ+c=; b=dwOhHXEJmguKL6GgnlgMifF8pGc/g8JyvK/+nnoP77EiAnlIHnjF5XxoeIZmim7DA46Rmt GxOapxbvnNh/m3I1tUEXcgoJH0HGkpnFpvVHxktlDxqobJWQqeKh7C3vrq3fU1CPWmyQ0c 3VYOzfCQu2V37nr5I7I0YEjci36A7XjWhQKejsqkW/GdRCDdhMKIAkE3w0Vy7z4QfHJzbR qJu1xXJibhGF/NUbZaNRNbYj4hhFBtFkEEK7jLcS8aYo/p/k6B/6N1DfBgfMMLGfy84cD7 By8EPLtRm7ANHoNOg9Fqa/mQwOigJyao/46fYwSdJm+YBnxAUna5Fd72uRS+5Q== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1719594170; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Jn2yKHHkbzooKFBQWi8m60dWiIMnMpBH6e9WE51ONw0RQfEbdwemgyVB4GXSXeK7ZQgOvo wG5ug0xYLceXFP3zzwMtSplFcpB/H3wAFhuMXFw4zSwC5lSp+KLpZkn4eDsmQ3O+mQo516 E/E0WdykOUI+ctd9oqtLDf5e1OTiGJbOveBC80T3B/7SJfnb6g70PL9QZlaKRQ7Nevptu3 19wJq+RvoookPd0DALQytAk8RsHZaD4J8esNsoQeTQ6mM20Hm8k5ngsPM7mRTTSuirnhtj fxi8lroDSs4syJvnVrAY9ibE/FEDX3Yj6supJILZ8Rx7pSnRfOHY4ObtZgGjFg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=stebalien.com header.s=fm1 header.b="c Llg7Sp"; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=fbffVRAk; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=stebalien.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 050B61A56F for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:02:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sNEz4-0005Cx-3x; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:02:05 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sNEyc-00050M-Rj for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:01:37 -0400 Received: from fout8-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.151]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sNEyW-0005Bs-Rz; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:01:34 -0400 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA94138026F; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:01:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:01:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stebalien.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1719594085; x= 1719680485; bh=DG/HY3//TYichMASveJzj7CTu1l5wst9ZXyg/pHIJ+c=; b=c Llg7SpkKvPeNgU8xiPsH1d9KW4FWjv+kwEazhoelzkfVvYZeGm0yvsXuoSrGUUpC gGGdoWUGwEJ8AWH+8VJxd885KauzjrRr5WbA3UZo3BoYUxRirjtqKcFSoooMlaam 7pYBU2Em2CB9sgcuo7Moa0toQF16t0oToxzXEg0tGRBya4Earj56+4/jBSkKpYEa f/YwwPnvE/70cnQNeDSoQrksTlmn9XRyLwtmr9HXMe5xayfJ3kyO0xNLOD88ndTz 1AoHNnVBo3GaX36j4bXMqYMBOtT4Vi3lreCZH7C6Ey2JVhDuZIdjjK8tqIDsC/S7 ZqURvDVLKvRque2W2DKSQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1719594085; x=1719680485; bh=DG/HY3//TYichMASveJzj7CTu1l5 wst9ZXyg/pHIJ+c=; b=fbffVRAkDZFwBM+r5W0J/5OtWTS7e9/vsthbF0SPQh64 dTYyh+O9j7y4E4Lg9ybfJk39qIKQz2ckVOseD0jqSQdpP2in+GAjb26MgmRG6g0d /qZcS/up1hgxI1KqC3RWYvZQlC58KmyitY1LEz14kzn+ZJJPrD//U4OcOvMjbR+/ RjJUhx4n26EvXaWpQE3m1uW7Kg1aMMw1zaxYBtKl/nuZ1uE8SxVoi2xHOY7AKo+l qON4ttcZoPwFqFtW1UgnjNvp751PJq/SR9RaaUNIaBjeqxk62piCnw/Y53TI8oMt kfxlLEjBlfSuc6WoQ8vB5ceti1lAsIzY03NnuOZv6w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrtdejgdehvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfggtgesthdtredttddttdenucfhrhhomhepufhtvghvvghn ucetlhhlvghnuceoshhtvghvvghnsehsthgvsggrlhhivghnrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpedvkeehkeegleehheeggfduleektefhhffgueffteekgedtvdefuddutddt jeejvdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe hsthgvvhgvnhesshhtvggsrghlihgvnhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: ie8a146a7:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:01:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven Allen To: Suhail Singh Cc: Suhail Singh , Ihor Radchenko , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Bastien Subject: Re: [POLL] We plan to remove #+LINK: ...%(my-function) placeholder from link abbreviation spec In-Reply-To: <874j9d3tjp.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87sex5gdqc.fsf@localhost> <87wmm96r53.fsf@localhost> <87cyo13w0x.fsf@gmail.com> <87pls1ox7v.fsf@stebalien.com> <874j9d3tjp.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:01:22 -0700 Message-ID: <87msn5ovbx.fsf@stebalien.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=103.168.172.151; envelope-from=steven@stebalien.com; helo=fout8-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 050B61A56F X-Migadu-Scanner: mx12.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -10.57 X-Spam-Score: -10.57 X-TUID: M12wFVDqgxvO Suhail Singh writes: > Steven Allen 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.