https://github.com/DonatNagyE commented:

These are small and straightforward improvements, they mostly LGTM.

Note that in the commit message of "[[analyzer] Fix stdin declaration in C++ 
tests](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074/commits/ededc22487a23a7deaa971526da8a932ea27b231)"
 the first line contains a typo ("shoulkd").

On the commit "[[analyzer] Fix taint sink rules for exec-like 
functions](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074/commits/c54e1342fe93a51acce9148072d60d8783333194)"
 I think that the old behavior might be intentional: it reports situations when 
malicious actors may influence which executable will be ran, but does not 
report situations when the arguments passed to a (presumably trusted) 
executable contain user input.

Of course, there are situations where tainted arguments are also very 
problematic (e.g. calling `sudo`, `sh` or similar "execute something" 
programs), and I can accept this as a policy change, but I wouldn't call it a 
"Fix" of outright buggy behavior.

On the meta level, I'd also remark that this "four commits in one batch" review 
is cumbersome (at least for me -- I'm not accustomed to github gui), and I'd 
prefer to see separate pull requests for unrelated commits if that's not a 
serious problem for you.

In summary, I'd say that:
-  [[analyzer] Make socket accept() propagate 
taint](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074/commits/b3215f7b2e5df91bb0a12cbe309929ee9d764b16)
 and [[analyzer] Propagate taint for wchar variants of some 
APIs](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074/commits/63b6a37624935ae0bb52b830e15b015998559e06)
 definitely LGTM; feel free to push them separately.
- On [[analyzer] Fix stdin declaration in C++ 
tests](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074/commits/ededc22487a23a7deaa971526da8a932ea27b231)
 I have an inline question but the change is acceptable as it's now.
- On [[analyzer] Fix taint sink rules for exec-like 
functions](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074/commits/c54e1342fe93a51acce9148072d60d8783333194)
 I'd wait a bit to see the opinion of others about handling the `exec...` 
functions in a stricter manner.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66074
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to