The amount of cross compilation required for these tests was too time-consuming
for how much value they added. test-stack-traces now cover these well enough,
especially as we add more exotic machines to the CI fleet to run native tests.
Also add a standalone test which covers the `-fentry` case. It does this
by performing two reproducible compilations which are identical other
than having different entry points, and checking whether the emitted
binaries are identical (they should *not* be).
Resolves: #23869
This is fairly straightforward; the actual compiler changes are limited
to the CLI, since `Compilation` already supports this combination.
A new `std.Build` API is introduced to allow representing this. By
passing the `emit_object` option to `std.Build.addTest`, you get a
`Step.Compile` which emits an object file; you can then use that as you
would any other object, such as either installing it for external use,
or linking it into another step.
A standalone test is added to cover the build system API. It builds a
test into an object, and links it into a final executable, which it then
runs.
Using this build system mechanism prevents the build system from
noticing that you're running a `zig test`, so the build runner and test
runner do not communicate over stdio. However, that's okay, because the
real-world use cases for this feature don't want to do that anyway!
Resolves: #23374
Adds a missing call to addLazyPathDependenciesOnly in
std.Build.Module.addCSourceFiles. Also fixes an issue in
std.Build.Step.WriteFile where it wasn't updating all the GeneratedFile
instances for every directory. To fix the second issue, I removed
all the GeneratedFile instances and now all files/directories reference
the steps main GeneratedFile via sub paths.
* Skip building libcxx mt-only source files when single-threaded.
* This change is required for llvm18 libcxx.
* Add standalone test to link a trivial:
- mt-executable with libcxx
- st-executable with libcxx
This allows running commands that take an output directory argument. The
main thing that was needed for this feature was generated file subpaths,
to allow access to the files in a generated directory. Additionally, a
minor change was required to so that the correct directory is created
for output directory args.
> Note: This first part is mostly a rephrasing of https://flatt.tech/research/posts/batbadbut-you-cant-securely-execute-commands-on-windows/
> See that article for more details
On Windows, it is possible to execute `.bat`/`.cmd` scripts via CreateProcessW. When this happens, `CreateProcessW` will (under-the-hood) spawn a `cmd.exe` process with the path to the script and the args like so:
cmd.exe /c script.bat arg1 arg2
This is a problem because:
- `cmd.exe` has its own, separate, parsing/escaping rules for arguments
- Environment variables in arguments will be expanded before the `cmd.exe` parsing rules are applied
Together, this means that (1) maliciously constructed arguments can lead to arbitrary command execution via the APIs in `std.process.Child` and (2) escaping according to the rules of `cmd.exe` is not enough on its own.
A basic example argv field that reproduces the vulnerability (this will erroneously spawn `calc.exe`):
.argv = &.{ "test.bat", "\"&calc.exe" },
And one that takes advantage of environment variable expansion to still spawn calc.exe even if the args are properly escaped for `cmd.exe`:
.argv = &.{ "test.bat", "%CMDCMDLINE:~-1%&calc.exe" },
(note: if these spawned e.g. `test.exe` instead of `test.bat`, they wouldn't be vulnerable; it's only `.bat`/`.cmd` scripts that are vulnerable since they go through `cmd.exe`)
Zig allows passing `.bat`/`.cmd` scripts as `argv[0]` via `std.process.Child`, so the Zig API is affected by this vulnerability. Note also that Zig will search `PATH` for `.bat`/`.cmd` scripts, so spawning something like `foo` may end up executing `foo.bat` somewhere in the PATH (the PATH searching of Zig matches the behavior of cmd.exe).
> Side note to keep in mind: On Windows, the extension is significant in terms of how Windows will try to execute the command. If the extension is not `.bat`/`.cmd`, we know that it will not attempt to be executed as a `.bat`/`.cmd` script (and vice versa). This means that we can just look at the extension to know if we are trying to execute a `.bat`/`.cmd` script.
---
This general class of problem has been documented before in 2011 here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/twistylittlepassagesallalike/everyone-quotes-command-line-arguments-the-wrong-way
and the course of action it suggests for escaping when executing .bat/.cmd files is:
- Escape first using the non-cmd.exe rules
- Then escape all cmd.exe 'metacharacters' (`(`, `)`, `%`, `!`, `^`, `"`, `<`, `>`, `&`, and `|`) with `^`
However, escaping with ^ on its own is insufficient because it does not stop cmd.exe from expanding environment variables. For example:
```
args.bat %PATH%
```
escaped with ^ (and wrapped in quotes that are also escaped), it *will* stop cmd.exe from expanding `%PATH%`:
```
> args.bat ^"^%PATH^%^"
"%PATH%"
```
but it will still try to expand `%PATH^%`:
```
set PATH^^=123
> args.bat ^"^%PATH^%^"
"123"
```
The goal is to stop *all* environment variable expansion, so this won't work.
Another problem with the ^ approach is that it does not seem to allow all possible command lines to round trip through cmd.exe (as far as I can tell at least).
One known example:
```
args.bat ^"\^"key^=value\^"^"
```
where args.bat is:
```
@echo %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
```
will print
```
"\"key value\""
```
(it will turn the `=` into a space for an unknown reason; other minor variations do roundtrip, e.g. `\^"key^=value\^"`, `^"key^=value^"`, so it's unclear what's going on)
It may actually be possible to escape with ^ such that every possible command line round trips correctly, but it's probably not worth the effort to figure it out, since the suggested mitigation for BatBadBut has better roundtripping and leads to less garbled command lines overall.
---
Ultimately, the mitigation used here is the same as the one suggested in:
https://flatt.tech/research/posts/batbadbut-you-cant-securely-execute-commands-on-windows/
The mitigation steps are reproduced here, noted with one deviation that Zig makes (following Rust's lead):
1. Replace percent sign (%) with %%cd:~,%.
2. Replace the backslash (\) in front of the double quote (") with two backslashes (\\).
3. Replace the double quote (") with two double quotes ("").
4. ~~Remove newline characters (\n).~~
- Instead, `\n`, `\r`, and NUL are disallowed and will trigger `error.InvalidBatchScriptArg` if they are found in `argv`. These three characters do not roundtrip through a `.bat` file and therefore are of dubious/no use. It's unclear to me if `\n` in particular is relevant to the BatBadBut vulnerability (I wasn't able to find a reproduction with \n and the post doesn't mention anything about it except in the suggested mitigation steps); it just seems to act as a 'end of arguments' marker and therefore anything after the `\n` is lost (and same with NUL). `\r` seems to be stripped from the command line arguments when passed through a `.bat`/`.cmd`, so that is also disallowed to ensure that `argv` can always fully roundtrip through `.bat`/`.cmd`.
5. Enclose the argument with double quotes (").
The escaped command line is then run as something like:
cmd.exe /d /e:ON /v:OFF /c "foo.bat arg1 arg2"
Note: Previously, we would pass `foo.bat arg1 arg2` as the command line and the path to `foo.bat` as the app name and let CreateProcessW handle the `cmd.exe` spawning for us, but because we need to pass `/e:ON` and `/v:OFF` to cmd.exe to ensure the mitigation is effective, that is no longer tenable. Instead, we now get the full path to `cmd.exe` and use that as the app name when executing `.bat`/`.cmd` files.
---
A standalone test has also been added that tests two things:
1. Known reproductions of the vulnerability are tested to ensure that they do not reproduce the vulnerability
2. Randomly generated command line arguments roundtrip when passed to a `.bat` file and then are passed from the `.bat` file to a `.exe`. This fuzz test is as thorough as possible--it tests that things like arbitrary Unicode codepoints and unpaired surrogates roundtrip successfully.
Note: In order for the `CreateProcessW` -> `.bat` -> `.exe` roundtripping to succeed, the .exe must split the arguments using the post-2008 C runtime argv splitting implementation, see https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/19655 for details on when that change was made in Zig.
On Windows, the command line arguments of a program are a single WTF-16 encoded string and it's up to the program to split it into an array of strings. In C/C++, the entry point of the C runtime takes care of splitting the command line and passing argc/argv to the main function.
https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/18309 updated ArgIteratorWindows to match the behavior of CommandLineToArgvW, but it turns out that CommandLineToArgvW's behavior does not match the behavior of the C runtime post-2008. In 2008, the C runtime argv splitting changed how it handles consecutive double quotes within a quoted argument (it's now considered an escaped quote, e.g. `"foo""bar"` post-2008 would get parsed into `foo"bar`), and the rules around argv[0] were also changed.
This commit makes ArgIteratorWindows match the behavior of the post-2008 C runtime, and adds a standalone test that verifies the behavior matches both the MSVC and MinGW argv splitting exactly in all cases (it checks that randomly generated command line strings get split the same way).
The motivation here is roughly the same as when the same change was made in Rust (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87580), that is (paraphrased):
- Consistent behavior between Zig and modern C/C++ programs
- Allows users to escape double quotes in a way that can be more straightforward
Additionally, the suggested mitigation for BatBadBut (https://flatt.tech/research/posts/batbadbut-you-cant-securely-execute-commands-on-windows/) relies on the post-2008 argv splitting behavior for roundtripping of the arguments given to `cmd.exe`. Note: it's not necessary for the suggested mitigation to work, but it is necessary for the suggested escaping to be parsed back into the intended argv by ArgIteratorWindows after being run through a `.bat` file.
