Threats tagged 'ghsa-69hj-f68j-2879'

`UnixFileLock`, the backend of `FileLock` and `AsyncFileLock` on Unix, empties whatever regular file it finds at the lock path once it holds the `flock` (a kernel lock on an open file). With an explicit `mode` it also chmods that file (sets its permission bits), whether or not this acquire created it. Another local user who can rename or hard-link one of the files of the user running the lock (below: the lock user) onto the lock path gets that file truncated by the lock user's next `acquire()`. A hard link is a second name for the same file. With a mode such as `0o666` the file, still owned by the lock user, also becomes readable and writable by that other user. The other user can then read and alter everything the lock user writes to it afterwards. `O_NOFOLLOW`, the defence added for the symlink variant (CVE-2025-68146), does not see a renamed file or a hard link. The rename route needs the file's directory to be writable without the sticky bit (a directory flag that lets only a file's owner remove or rename it). The hard-link route into a sticky directory such as `/tmp` needs `fs.protected_hardlinks=0`, a Linux kernel setting. Affected versions are every filelock release up to and including 4.2.0 (the truncation is as old as the project; the chmod since 3.10.2). Anthropic's OSS Scanner reported this in private. Finding covered by this advisory: - `ANT-2026-KO573NWI` [high, CWE-706]: UnixFileLock truncates and chmods victim files renamed onto the lock path. ## Severity **CVSS 3.1 `CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N` scores 6.1 (Medium).** `AV:L` (local): the other user needs an account on the same host. `PR:L` (low privileges): an ordinary account is enough. `UI:N` (no user interaction). `AC:L` (low attack complexity): one rename or link, then wait for the lock user's next acquire; no race. `I:H` (high integrity impact): the lock user's own process truncates a file it did not mean to touch, including content behind a second name the other user could neither modify nor delete. With a permissive explicit `mode` the other user can then write to it. If that file is one the lock user later executes or trusts, that is code execution as the lock user. `C:L` (partial confidentiality impact): the old content is gone before the other user can read anything, but what the lock user writes afterwards through a descriptor (the number the kernel gives a process for an open file) it still holds is readable. `A:N` (no availability impact). `S:U` (scope unchanged). Classification from the review: **security, conditional** on another user controlling names in a non-sticky directory on the lock's filesystem (or on `fs.protected_hardlinks=0`). The scanner rated this high. The maintainers score it medium because the reachable targets depend on the directory layout and kernel settings described below. ## Scope and preconditions - Lock classes: `FileLock` and `AsyncFileLock` on Unix (`UnixFileLock`). `SoftFileLock` applies an explicit mode only to a file it created with `O_CREAT | O_EXCL` and does not truncate an existing file. `WindowsFileLock` has not truncated at any version. - The other user must put a regular file of the lock user at the lock path before the lock user's next acquire, while the lock file does not exist yet. That is the case on first use, after a reboot, after a `/tmp` cleaner, or after a release with the default `preserve_lock_file=False`, which unlinks the file. The scanner checked three ways at the scanned commit, with default kernel settings unless stated: - rename inside a directory without the sticky bit (a group-writable project or cache directory, a root-created `0777` directory); - rename from such a directory into a sticky one (`1777`) on the same filesystem. The sticky bit only protects entries that already exist, so the move succeeds while the lock path is free. Once the lock user's lock file exists there, the same move fails with `EPERM`; - `link(2)` into a sticky directory. This needs a system that lets a user hard-link a file it cannot write, which on Linux means `fs.protected_hardlinks=0`. Mainstream distributions set 1, which refuses the link. The scanner did not test macOS or the BSDs. - What the lock user loses: with the default `FileLock(path)` the lock truncates the file, which keeps its mode. With an explicit `mode` (a lock shared between users needs `0o666` or `0o660`, because `UnixFileLock` opens the file read-write), the lock also chmods the file to that mode. `_apply_explicit_mode` suppresses `PermissionError` only for files the lock user does not own. The lock user owns its own files, so the `fchmod` succeeds. - Trust boundary: the protection against another local user holds only when no other user can rename entries in the lock's directory or, for the rename-into-sticky route, in any directory on the same filesystem that holds a file of the lock user. A user who can rename entries in a non-sticky directory above the lock controls every name below it, which n