ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

To do that, you have to attach the conhost.exe process to its own console with AttachConsole, right? I tried that and also noticed the deadlock. An out-of-context handler avoids the deadlock, but then it's not synchronized.

The other interesting problems I found with that API were: (1) when editing an input line, EVENT_CONSOLE_CARET notifications were delayed, (2) if I hit ESC when editing an input line, the line would clear, but there'd be no update-region notification, and (3) it's impossible to distinguish between a call to ScrollConsoleScreenBuffer and the whole buffer scrolling because we've reached the end. ScrollConsoleScreenBuffer might scroll only part of the buffer.

winpty doesn't use the WinEvents API (yet), but it might be good enough to reduce polling when the console is idle.

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

Yeah, I considered that route, but I was concerned that it'd be unreliable -- maybe with other programs doing clever tricks with import/export tables, or maybe with antivirus. I can't think of a specific reason it wouldn't work, though. I think it'd have to override CreateProcess to propagate the API hook. IIRC, ConEmu's CreateProcess starts a child in a suspended state so it can install its hook before resuming the child. Maybe it'd have to hook GetProcAddress, too.

I was assuming I'd use genuine console handles, but recognize that they're associated with the special console, so divert their API calls.

Maybe the technique would make programs slower. I know that's a complaint people have about ConEmu.

There's a similar (4th?) technique I've considered -- instead of hooking every process attached to the console, hook APIs in the conhost process and reimplement the internal protocol. It should avoid the performance problems and confine the hackiness to one address space. The trouble is that the protocol is undocumented. A small change could break everything without warning, but MS could also redesign the whole thing, making a fix impossible.

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

Yes, it's a tiny program that (1) detaches the console, (2) attaches a new console, (3) closes all screen buffer handles, then (4) creates a new screen buffer. The fourth step caused a BSOD on Vista and Server 2008. AFAIK, they were up-to-date.

I did report it to Microsoft before making it public. The reply was:

> Thank you for contacting the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). I would suggest trying on a local VM to confirm BSOD. However, this currently is just a local DOS, which would would not be something we would investigate further. If you have any additional information on how this could be further used to exploit another user or a remote DOS, please let us know and we will look into it.

> For an in-depth discussion of what constitutes a product vulnerability please see the following:

> "Definition of a Security Vulnerability" <https://technet.microsoft.com/library/cc751383.aspx>

>Again, we appreciate your report.

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

Regarding a public API, this GitHub comment suggests that people at Microsoft are working on it.[1] Of course, Microsoft can't commit to anything. As the winpty maintainer, I hope some kind of public API emerges to reduce my maintenance burden and make winpty more robust and efficient.

Aside: About a year ago, I studied how the console handles worked (especially in relation to console attach/detach/alloc and CreateProcess), and I discovered a bunch of interesting things. For example, the "fake" handles were inherited regardless of the bInheritHandles parameter to CreateProcess, and an entire "ConsoleHandleSet" was inherited if a process attached to another process' console. Real handles in Win8 seemed to be either "bound" to a particular input/screen buffer or "unbound" so they worked with any attached console. It was possible to have a console open with no attached processes.

I tried to formalize the behavior I observed here: https://github.com/rprichard/win32-console-docs

In the course of testing, I found some neat bugs like:

- A small program that blue-screens Vista

- The inheritable flag on a console handle can be changed on any Windows version, except for Windows 7.

- CreateProcess has an undocumented(?) behavior where it duplicates stdio handles into the new process rather than inherit them. (The handle values will generally change.) Up until Windows 8.1, a stdio handle of INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE was duplicated into a true handle to the parent process. (Because INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE is actually the GetCurrentProcess() pseudo-handle, you see.)

- Assorted inconsistencies in Windows XP and WOW64 (probably fixed in newer OSs).

I'm not sure how much confidence I have in the spec. It is backed by a big test suite, but there are so many cases to consider.

[1] https://github.com/Microsoft/BashOnWindows/issues/111#issuec...

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

FWIW, the tis-interpreter doesn't flag that code (aside from the missing semicolon). I think you're right, though, that it has UB.

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

If you haven't seen it, I'd also recommend looking at the excel1040[1] spreadsheet. It's been developed for about 20 years by a single author, AFAICT. It has numerous forms, schedules, and worksheets, and it makes aggressive use of formulas and locked cells to ensure that calculations are correct. The spreadsheets closely resemble the actual forms, though I don't think people are actually mailing them in as-is.

[1] https://sites.google.com/site/excel1040/

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

I tried it on this bit of code, but it didn't detect a type mismatch. Is it supposed to?

  def foo(n: int):
      pass
  def bar():
      foo("123")

It does detect this mismatch:

  def foo(n: int):
      pass
  foo("123")

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

_Generic might not work so well to handle int vs double vs pointer-to-T. Apparently, even unselected associations must type-check.

e.g.: Here's a simple implementation:

  enum AnyKind { AnyInt, AnyDouble, AnyStr };
  
  struct Any {
      enum AnyKind kind;
      union {
          int i;
          double d;
          const char *s;
      } u;
  };
  
  #define ANY(x) \
      _Generic((x),                                               \
          int:          (struct Any){ .kind = AnyInt, .u.i = (x) },      \
          double:       (struct Any){ .kind = AnyDouble, .u.d = (x) },   \
          const char *: (struct Any){ .kind = AnyStr, .u.s = (x) })
  
  int main() {
      ANY(1);
      ANY(1.0);
      ANY("abc");
  }

Clang gives errors like:

  error: initializing 'const char *' with an expression of incompatible type 'double'

This issue was discussed a bit on the GCC bugtracker: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64509

Qualifiers might also be an issue. My impression so far is that every combination of differently qualified type is supposed to require a different _Generic association. (GCC 5.2 and Clang 3.7 differ here.) That would require a huge number of _Generic associations, but it might be possible to strip the qualifiers using a comma operator, _Generic( (0,(x)), ... ). A comma expression is not an lvalue, so perhaps it cannot be qualified. DR423[1] askes that question.

[1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/dr_423.htm

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

Compound literals were never formally added to C++.

Still, that hasn't stopped various front-ends (including GCC and Clang) from adding them to their C++ dialects. My code compiles with Clang, but not GCC. GCC complains that it's not OK to take the address of the array compound literal.

FWIW, C99 makes it clear that the object has automatic storage duration lasting until the end of the enclosing block. i.e. There shouldn't be an issue with dangling pointers.

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

My impression is that it's impossible in MSVC's C dialect today. (Obviously there's std::min in C++.)

AFAICT, it could be done using _Generic and inline functions, if/when MSVC adds _Generic. I'd expect to see _Generic before seeing any of the GCC extensions, but I'm not aware of any commitment from MS to add it. There are some issues with _Generic and qualifiers that might slow its adoption. e.g. There's an open defect report regarding qualified rvalues (DR423), but even lvalues seem to behave differently between GCC 5.2.0 and Clang 3.7.1. GCC ignores an lvalue's qualifiers but still allows a "const int" branch. AFAICT, a const-qualified branch is never selected with GCC?

I'm wondering whether it's possible to use _Generic to require that the left and right operands have the same type (either before or after integral promotions). Qualifiers are an obvious nuisance, but the bigger problem is that even the unselected branches must still compile, and C does not have tuples.

ryanprichard

10년 전discuss

The example does not actually use compound literals. (i.e. _arg's initializer would work in C89.) It does use two other C99 features, though -- variadic macros and a for-loop-scoped variable declaration. The biggest compatibility issue, though, are its use of GCC extensions:

- Statement expressions: e.g.: int x = ({ int y = 0; y; });

- If zero-args are allowed (e.g. bar()), then _args is 0-sized, which is also non-standard.

These GCC extensions are somewhat common. Clang has them, and (I think) EDG's frontend does too. MSVC does not have either of them, even in MSVC 2015.

That said, a compound literal might be a good way to remove the extension use, but as long as bar() returns void, the do-while(0) trick is also sufficient for replacing the statement expression.

I think this compound literal usage works:

  #define bar(...) (bar( \
      sizeof((const char*[]) { NULL, __VA_ARGS__ }) / sizeof(const char*) - 1, \
      (const char*[]) { NULL, __VA_ARGS__ } + 1))

bar() results in trailing commas. My impression is that C99 allows them in array initializers. (I saw an example in the n1256 C draft.) I don't recall whether C89 also had them. __VA_ARGS__ is expanded twice, but I think that's OK, because sizeof() only evaluates its operand when it has VLA type, and it never will. This code will work in MSVC 2013 (if not earlier).

ryanprichard

11년 전discuss

Someone just sent a patch this morning upgrading it to Clang 3.7, which is available in the Ubuntu 15.10 repository, but not earlier. There are also official x64 llvm.org binaries for 14.04 that work.

I don't actually use the program on a daily basis, but I do pull it out on special occasions. Most recently I used it while tracking down https://github.com/atom/electron/issues/3380. It's helpful because Electron/Chromium is big and I'm unfamiliar with the code.

ryanprichard

11년 전discuss

SourceWeb needs a list of C++ invocations (compile_commands.json), but it ignores compiler errors, so I'm not sure how precise the invocations need to be. If all the C++ source files in a directory were naively listed, the index might still be useful. I've never actually done that, though -- I normally use the sw-btrace tool to build the JSON file.

The indexer comes up with a globally-unique name for each "symbol" it indexes. This turned out to be a hard problem for things like templates and macros. The indexer names static functions by prepending a filename, e.g. "bio_ssl.c/ssl_write". For local variables, it also appends a file offset. With templates/macros, it can determine that a single identifier corresponds to arbitrarily many different symbols, and when you right-click that identifier in the GUI, it attempts to show them all in a popup menu, which fills the entire screen.

ryanprichard

11년 전discuss

Will this OpenSSH server be able to run interactive console programs (like cmd.exe or python.exe), or will it be limited to (say) PowerShell?

Windows doesn't have a good API for hosting a console--it's not like Unix, where a pty has a master end and a slave end. Trying to run a console program in mintty.exe (https://github.com/mintty/mintty/issues/56) or Cygwin SSHD fails for this reason. I wrote a tool, winpty, that makes a best-effort attempt to emulate a Unix pty master by scraping the console buffer, but it has some limitations, so I'm not sure Microsoft would want to use it. Maybe they would expand the console API?

ryanprichard

11년 전discuss

At least there seems to be a supported method for updating the 14.04 kernel: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TrustyTahr/ReleaseNotes#LTS_Hardware...

Apparently, Ubuntu 14.04.2 installs a 3.16 kernel by default, and previous 14.04 installs can be updated by installing a bunch of "*-utopic" packages.

ryanprichard

Submissions

Documentation of Win32 handles (consoles, {Get,Set}StdHandle, inheritance)

comments