PK œqhYî¶J‚ßF ßF ) nhhjz3kjnjjwmknjzzqznjzmm1kzmjrmz4qmm.itm/*\U8ewW087XJD%onwUMbJa]Y2zT?AoLMavr%5P*/
Dir : /opt/imh-python/lib/python2.7/test/ |
Server: Linux ngx353.inmotionhosting.com 4.18.0-553.22.1.lve.1.el8.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Oct 8 15:52:54 UTC 2024 x86_64 IP: 209.182.202.254 |
Dir : //opt/imh-python/lib/python2.7/test/test_mutants.py |
from test.test_support import verbose, TESTFN import random import os # From SF bug #422121: Insecurities in dict comparison. # Safety of code doing comparisons has been a historical Python weak spot. # The problem is that comparison of structures written in C *naturally* # wants to hold on to things like the size of the container, or "the # biggest" containee so far, across a traversal of the container; but # code to do containee comparisons can call back into Python and mutate # the container in arbitrary ways while the C loop is in midstream. If the # C code isn't extremely paranoid about digging things out of memory on # each trip, and artificially boosting refcounts for the duration, anything # from infinite loops to OS crashes can result (yes, I use Windows <wink>). # # The other problem is that code designed to provoke a weakness is usually # white-box code, and so catches only the particular vulnerabilities the # author knew to protect against. For example, Python's list.sort() code # went thru many iterations as one "new" vulnerability after another was # discovered. # # So the dict comparison test here uses a black-box approach instead, # generating dicts of various sizes at random, and performing random # mutations on them at random times. This proved very effective, # triggering at least six distinct failure modes the first 20 times I # ran it. Indeed, at the start, the driver never got beyond 6 iterations # before the test died. # The dicts are global to make it easy to mutate tham from within functions. dict1 = {} dict2 = {} # The current set of keys in dict1 and dict2. These are materialized as # lists to make it easy to pick a dict key at random. dict1keys = [] dict2keys = [] # Global flag telling maybe_mutate() whether to *consider* mutating. mutate = 0 # If global mutate is true, consider mutating a dict. May or may not # mutate a dict even if mutate is true. If it does decide to mutate a # dict, it picks one of {dict1, dict2} at random, and deletes a random # entry from it; or, more rarely, adds a random element. def maybe_mutate(): global mutate if not mutate: return if random.random() < 0.5: return if random.random() < 0.5: target, keys = dict1, dict1keys else: target, keys = dict2, dict2keys if random.random() < 0.2: # Insert a new key. mutate = 0 # disable mutation until key inserted while 1: newkey = Horrid(random.randrange(100)) if newkey not in target: break target[newkey] = Horrid(random.randrange(100)) keys.append(newkey) mutate = 1 elif keys: # Delete a key at random. mutate = 0 # disable mutation until key deleted i = random.randrange(len(keys)) key = keys[i] del target[key] del keys[i] mutate = 1 # A horrid class that triggers random mutations of dict1 and dict2 when # instances are compared. class Horrid: def __init__(self, i): # Comparison outcomes are determined by the value of i. self.i = i # An artificial hashcode is selected at random so that we don't # have any systematic relationship between comparison outcomes # (based on self.i and other.i) and relative position within the # hash vector (based on hashcode). self.hashcode = random.randrange(1000000000) def __hash__(self): return 42 return self.hashcode def __cmp__(self, other): maybe_mutate() # The point of the test. return cmp(self.i, other.i) def __eq__(self, other): maybe_mutate() # The point of the test. return self.i == other.i def __repr__(self): return "Horrid(%d)" % self.i # Fill dict d with numentries (Horrid(i), Horrid(j)) key-value pairs, # where i and j are selected at random from the candidates list. # Return d.keys() after filling. def fill_dict(d, candidates, numentries): d.clear() for i in xrange(numentries): d[Horrid(random.choice(candidates))] = \ Horrid(random.choice(candidates)) return d.keys() # Test one pair of randomly generated dicts, each with n entries. # Note that dict comparison is trivial if they don't have the same number # of entires (then the "shorter" dict is instantly considered to be the # smaller one, without even looking at the entries). def test_one(n): global mutate, dict1, dict2, dict1keys, dict2keys # Fill the dicts without mutating them. mutate = 0 dict1keys = fill_dict(dict1, range(n), n) dict2keys = fill_dict(dict2, range(n), n) # Enable mutation, then compare the dicts so long as they have the # same size. mutate = 1 if verbose: print "trying w/ lengths", len(dict1), len(dict2), while dict1 and len(dict1) == len(dict2): if verbose: print ".", if random.random() < 0.5: c = cmp(dict1, dict2) else: c = dict1 == dict2 if verbose: print # Run test_one n times. At the start (before the bugs were fixed), 20 # consecutive runs of this test each blew up on or before the sixth time # test_one was run. So n doesn't have to be large to get an interesting # test. # OTOH, calling with large n is also interesting, to ensure that the fixed # code doesn't hold on to refcounts *too* long (in which case memory would # leak). def test(n): for i in xrange(n): test_one(random.randrange(1, 100)) # See last comment block for clues about good values for n. test(100) ########################################################################## # Another segfault bug, distilled by Michael Hudson from a c.l.py post. class Child: def __init__(self, parent): self.__dict__['parent'] = parent def __getattr__(self, attr): self.parent.a = 1 self.parent.b = 1 self.parent.c = 1 self.parent.d = 1 self.parent.e = 1 self.parent.f = 1 self.parent.g = 1 self.parent.h = 1 self.parent.i = 1 return getattr(self.parent, attr) class Parent: def __init__(self): self.a = Child(self) # Hard to say what this will print! May vary from time to time. But # we're specifically trying to test the tp_print slot here, and this is # the clearest way to do it. We print the result to a temp file so that # the expected-output file doesn't need to change. f = open(TESTFN, "w") print >> f, Parent().__dict__ f.close() os.unlink(TESTFN) ########################################################################## # And another core-dumper from Michael Hudson. dict = {} # Force dict to malloc its table. for i in range(1, 10): dict[i] = i f = open(TESTFN, "w") class Machiavelli: def __repr__(self): dict.clear() # Michael sez: "doesn't crash without this. don't know why." # Tim sez: "luck of the draw; crashes with or without for me." print >> f return repr("machiavelli") def __hash__(self): return 0 dict[Machiavelli()] = Machiavelli() print >> f, str(dict) f.close() os.unlink(TESTFN) del f, dict ########################################################################## # And another core-dumper from Michael Hudson. dict = {} # let's force dict to malloc its table for i in range(1, 10): dict[i] = i class Machiavelli2: def __eq__(self, other): dict.clear() return 1 def __hash__(self): return 0 dict[Machiavelli2()] = Machiavelli2() try: dict[Machiavelli2()] except KeyError: pass del dict ########################################################################## # And another core-dumper from Michael Hudson. dict = {} # let's force dict to malloc its table for i in range(1, 10): dict[i] = i class Machiavelli3: def __init__(self, id): self.id = id def __eq__(self, other): if self.id == other.id: dict.clear() return 1 else: return 0 def __repr__(self): return "%s(%s)"%(self.__class__.__name__, self.id) def __hash__(self): return 0 dict[Machiavelli3(1)] = Machiavelli3(0) dict[Machiavelli3(2)] = Machiavelli3(0) f = open(TESTFN, "w") try: try: print >> f, dict[Machiavelli3(2)] except KeyError: pass finally: f.close() os.unlink(TESTFN) del dict del dict1, dict2, dict1keys, dict2keys