All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Marc Becker via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,  Marc Becker <becm@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wincred: fix line split of secret blob content
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2026 14:16:12 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq1p9ymv6r.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.2251.git.1791553518774.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Marc Becker via GitGitGadget's message of "Fri, 09 Oct 2026 13:45:18 +0000")

"Marc Becker via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> From: Marc Becker <becm@gmx.de>
>
> operate on immutable blob data (wcsncpy_s still had invalid target size)
> split on newline character to avoid bleed-over on multi-line content

This needs a bit more work to make it more readable than a bulleted
list of lowercase fragments.

When in doubt, keep in mind that the usual way to compose a log
message of this project is to:

 - Give an observation on how the current system works in the
   present tense (so no need to say "Currently X is Y", or
   "Previously X was Y" to describe the state before your change;
   just "X is Y" is enough), and discuss what you perceive as a
   problem in it.

 - Propose a solution (optional---often, problem description
   trivially leads to an obvious solution in reader's minds).

 - Give commands to somebody editing the codebase to "make it so",
   instead of saying "This commit does X".

in this order.

 - It mentions wcsncpy_s having an invalid target size, but does not
   explain why it was invalid or the consequences. Is the issue that
   wcsncpy_s expects the buffer size in wide characters, but was
   being passed a size in bytes, which obviously cannot always
   agree?

 - It mentions "bleed-over on multi-line content", but does not
   describe the observable symptoms.  Is the issue that when the
   password is empty, the skipping by wcstok_s delimiter would cause
   the oauth_refresh_token line to be erroneously parsed as the
   password?

 - The final sentence should be an imperative command to the
   codebase, e.g., "Parse the blob in-place without copying and
   split lines manually using wmemchr()."

>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Becker <becm@gmx.de>
> ---
>     wincred: fix line split of secret blob content
>
> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-2251%2Fbecm%2Ffix-wincred-secret-linesplit-v1
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-2251/becm/fix-wincred-secret-linesplit-v1
> Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/2251
>
>  .../wincred/git-credential-wincred.c          | 86 ++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/contrib/credential/wincred/git-credential-wincred.c b/contrib/credential/wincred/git-credential-wincred.c
> index 22eb27ca31..584f457774 100644
> --- a/contrib/credential/wincred/git-credential-wincred.c
> +++ b/contrib/credential/wincred/git-credential-wincred.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  #include <stdio.h>
>  #include <io.h>
>  #include <fcntl.h>
> +#include <wchar.h>
>  #include <wincred.h>
>  
>  /* common helpers */
> @@ -148,51 +149,74 @@ static void get_credential(void)
>  {
>  	CREDENTIALW **creds;
>  	DWORD num_creds;
> -	int i;
> -	CREDENTIAL_ATTRIBUTEW *attr;
> -	WCHAR *secret;
> -	WCHAR *line;
> -	WCHAR *remaining_lines;
> -	WCHAR *part;
> -	WCHAR *remaining_parts;
>  
>  	if (!CredEnumerateW(L"git:*", 0, &num_creds, &creds))
>  		return;
>  
> -	/* search for the first credential that matches username */
> -	for (i = 0; i < num_creds; ++i)
> +	/* search for the first credential that matches target and username */
> +	for (int i = 0; i < num_creds; ++i) {
>  		if (match_cred(creds[i], 0)) {
> -			write_item("username", creds[i]->UserName,
> -				creds[i]->UserName ? wcslen(creds[i]->UserName) : 0);
> -			if (creds[i]->CredentialBlobSize > 0) {
> -				secret = xmalloc(creds[i]->CredentialBlobSize + sizeof(WCHAR));
> -				wcsncpy_s(secret, creds[i]->CredentialBlobSize, (LPCWSTR)creds[i]->CredentialBlob, creds[i]->CredentialBlobSize / sizeof(WCHAR));
> -				line = wcstok_s(secret, L"\r\n", &remaining_lines);
> -				write_item("password", line, line ? wcslen(line) : 0);
> -				while(line != NULL) {
> -					part = wcstok_s(line, L"=", &remaining_parts);
> -					if (!wcscmp(part, L"oauth_refresh_token")) {
> -						write_item("oauth_refresh_token", remaining_parts, remaining_parts ? wcslen(remaining_parts) : 0);
> -					}
> -					line = wcstok_s(NULL, L"\r\n", &remaining_lines);
> -				}
> -				free(secret);

The original was already bad, but this makes it even worse to have
the code nested too deeply.  Would separating out the body of the
for loop into a separate helper function, or perhaps standard tricks
like this

	for (...) {
		if (!match_cred(...))
			continue;
		... rest of the loop dedented by one tab stop ...
	}

make it readable?

> +			LPCWSTR username = creds[i]->UserName;
> +			LPCWSTR blob = (LPCWSTR)creds[i]->CredentialBlob;
> +			LPCWSTR end;
> +			DWORD wlen;
> +
> +			write_item("username", username, username ? wcslen(username) : 0);
> +
> +			wlen = creds[i]->CredentialBlobSize / sizeof(WCHAR);
> +
> +			// check if content is single line

			/* our single line comment should look like this */

> +			if ((end = wmemchr(blob, '\n', wlen)) == NULL) {

I do not do Windows and I do not often deal with wchar_t, so I do
not know how much practitioners of code like this one cares, but
would it be better to make the fact clear that we are not dealing
with a regular 'char' by writing a wchar_t literal like this as
L'\n'?  This is not a correctness suggestion, but a readability one.
Having a function prototype would coerse the parameter types, so
you may end up passing L'\n' either way.

> +				write_item("password", blob, wlen);
>  			} else {
> -				write_item("password",
> -						(LPCWSTR)creds[i]->CredentialBlob,
> -						creds[i]->CredentialBlobSize / sizeof(WCHAR));
> +				DWORD length = end++ - blob;

Here, "end" is of LPCWSTR type, aka "wchar_t *".  So is "blob".  The
difference would give us how many wide characters are in there.
That is not necessarily number of bytes starting at &blob[0].

> +				// correct remaining size and drop carriage return at line end
> +				wlen -= length + 1;
> +				if (length && blob[length - 1] == '\r') {

This CR is also side, right?

> +					--length;
> +				}
> +				write_item("password", blob, length);
> +
> +				// key/value content starting on next line
> +				blob = end;
> +				do {
> +					LPCWSTR value;
> +
> +					// find line end
> +					if ((end = wmemchr(blob, '\n', wlen)) == NULL) {
> +						length = wlen;
> +					} else {
> +						length = end++ - blob;
> +						// correct remaining size and drop carriage return at line end
> +						wlen -= length + 1;
> +						if (length && blob[length - 1] == '\r') {
> +							--length;
> +						}
> +					}
> +					// find key/value separator for extended credential info
> +					if ((value = wmemchr(blob, '=', length)) != NULL) {
> +						static const LPCWSTR refresh = L"oauth_refresh_token";
> +						DWORD klen = value - blob;

Value is also "wchar_t *", so klen counts the length in wchar_t,
which may be wider than a byte.  So is

> +						// write entries known to git credential protocol
> +						if (klen == wcslen(refresh) && memcmp(blob, refresh, klen) == 0) {

klen that counts number of wchar_t letters in refresh[] string.

So, is the memcmp() used to check if early part of blob[] match the
refresh[] as a whole correct, or is it only checking an early half
(or one fourth, depending on how much wider your wchar_t is compared
to char) of the string?

> +							write_item("oauth_refresh_token", value + 1, length - klen - 1);
> +						}
> +					}
> +				} while ((blob = end));
>  			}
>  			for (int j = 0; j < creds[i]->AttributeCount; j++) {
> -				attr = creds[i]->Attributes + j;
> +				CREDENTIAL_ATTRIBUTEW *attr = creds[i]->Attributes + j;
> +
>  				if (!wcscmp(attr->Keyword, L"git_password_expiry_utc")) {
> -					write_item("password_expiry_utc", (LPCWSTR)attr->Value,
> -					attr->ValueSize / sizeof(WCHAR));
> +					write_item("password_expiry_utc", (LPCWSTR)attr->Value, attr->ValueSize / sizeof(WCHAR));
>  					break;
>  				}
>  			}
>  			break;
>  		}
> -
> +	}
>  	CredFree(creds);
>  }
>  
>
> base-commit: 6de20f6092dcf9bdb1c8efe03db4b70c82b423dd

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-09 21:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-09 13:45 [PATCH] wincred: fix line split of secret blob content Marc Becker via GitGitGadget
2026-10-09 21:16 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2026-10-10 11:47 ` [PATCH v2] wincred: refactor credential blob processing Marc Becker via GitGitGadget
2026-10-12 21:27 ` [PATCH v3] " Marc Becker via GitGitGadget
2026-10-12 21:57   ` Junio C Hamano

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

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqq1p9ymv6r.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=becm@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    /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.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.