ftp file upload fails when special character is present in password - c

I was trying to upload a file through application i wrote in c.
As i did not find any API, i decided to go through commands.
Input command line looked like this.
ftp -u ftp://ftpuser:password#123#x.x.x.x/test.txt /tmp/test.txt
Whenever a special character is present, login will fail. when i tried with different user without any special characters in the password upload works.
How this issue can be resolved or is there any another method available like API which can be made use of.
If any sample code available then it will be of great help.
Special character means #, $, # (Ex : password#123, password$123)
code snippet:
RunCommandWithPipe(PSTRING CmdLine)
{
FILE *fp;
int status;
fp = popen(CmdLine, "r");
if (fp == NULL)
{
ErrGen(constErrOpenFile);
}
status = pclose(fp);
if (status == -1)
{
ErrGen(constErrCloseFile);
}
}

The reason why this doesn't work is because you are passing unfiltered meta characters into the shell. This is very dangerous. If someone untrustworthy gets to decide the value of any of the parameters to your ftp command, such as the username, password, ftp server, or file name, then that person will be able to run arbitrary shell commands.
You can see what's going on by putting an "echo" in front of your ftp command:
echo ftp -u ftp://ftpuser:password$123#x.x.x.x/test.txt /tmp/test.txt
You'll get this result:
ftp -u ftp://ftpuser:password23#x.x.x.x/test.txt /tmp/test.txt
The shell is trying to evaluate $1 as a variable, leaving an empty result.
There's a couple of things you can do.
1) Make the command safe by escaping all the meta characters. Here you need to be very careful, using a whitelist approach rather than just trying to get rid of the special characters you've thought of. In the whitelist approach you accept that some set of characters are safe, such as [A-Za-z0-9:_-]. Every other character you either strip out or escape by preceding it with a backslash. (eg. "foo:bar$baz&abc" becomes "foo:bar\$bazabc") If you do this way don't try to think of all the characters you know of that are special and escape those. You will most likely forget some, and not handle input this like:
ftp -u ftp://ftpuser:; rm -rf /;echo #x.x.x.x/test.txt /tmp/test.txt
2) Don't pass arguments on the shell, instead control the FTP client through fread()/fwrite() on the pipe that popen() gave you.
In this case what you do is launch the ftp client with no arguments. Then you write "OPEN 192.168.1.1" or wherever you want to connect. Then you write the username. Then you write the password. Then you write the GET or PUT command want. Then you write "EXIT" or write an EOF. You should read the result codes from the server. You'll get 200 series results on success. You'll get a 500 series result if the login is bad, etc.
You still have to watch out when piping into the FTP command because it will take shell escapes like "!rm -rf /", but there is much less opportunity for that than on the shell. You just need to make sure the strings you get to build your FTP commands are one line and that you always precede them with a valid FTP command. You should also watch out for any funny business with untrustworthy filenames. (eg. don't allow absolute paths, "..", and so forth)

You propably using a wrong charset to send the password

Related

Hiding password field in command line

I am writing a system service on FreeBSD where I need to take user credentials to verify identity, something like this:
./compression_bin -i <input_file> --type=<type> --password=<secret key>
Here, the secret key is used to authenticate user before compressing the given file. Currently, the secret key shows up in history which is bad and can be exploited. Is there a way where above can be invoked without displaying password field:
./compression_bin -i <input_file> --type=<type> --password=*********
The history will always record the text of the commands as they were issued. You could conceivably go back and modify the history file, but not only is that nasty, it still affords a window within which the password can be read.
Moreover, that's not even the easiest exploit. If the password is given on the command line then there are other ways it can be read while the command is running, such as from the output of the ps command, which is accessible to all users.
So don't take the password as a command-line argument. Read it from a file or from the standard input or from a socket, or some other such thing.

Execute any command-line shell like into execve

In case this is helpful, here's my environment: debian 8, gcc (with std = gnu99).
I am facing the following situation:
In my C program, I get a string (char* via a socket).
This string represents a bash command to execute (like 'ls ls').
This command can be any bash, as it may be complex (pipelines, lists, compound commands, coprocesses, shell function definitions ...).
I can not use system or popen to execute this command, so I use currently execve.
My concern is that I have to "filter" certain command.
For example, for the rm command, I can apply it only on the "/home/test/" directory. All other destinations is prohibited.
So I have to prevent the command "rm -r /" but also "ls ls && rm -r /".
So I have to parse the command line that is given me, to find all the command and apply filters on them.
And that's when I'm begin to be really lost.
The command can be of any complexity, so if I want to make pipelines (execve execute a command at a time) or if I want to find all commands for applying my filters, I'll have to develop parser identical to that of sh.
I do not like creating the wheel again, especially if I make it square.
So I wonder if there is a feature in the C library (or that of gnu) for that.
I have heard of wordexp, but I do not see how manage pipelines, redirection or other (in fact, this does not seem made for this) and i do not see how can I retrieve all the command inside the commande.
I read the man of sh(1) to see if I can use it to "parse" but not execute a command, but so far, I find nothing.
Do I need to code a parser from the beginning?
Thank for your reading, and I apologies for my bad english : it's not my motherlanguage (thanks google translate ...).
Your problem:
I am facing the following situation: In my C program, I get a string
(char* via a socket). This string represents a bash command to execute
(like 'ls ls'). This command can be any bash, as it may be complex
(pipelines, lists, compound commands, coprocesses, shell function
definitions ...).
How do you plan on authenticating who is at the other end of the socket connection?
You need to implement a command parser, with security considerations? Apparently to run commands remotely, as implied by "I get a string (char* via a socket)"?
The real solution:
How to set up SSH without passwords
Your aim
You want to use Linux and OpenSSH to automate your tasks. Therefore
you need an automatic login from host A / user a to Host B / user b.
You don't want to enter any passwords, because you want to call ssh
from a within a shell script.
Seriously.
That's how you solve this problem:
I receive on a socket a string that is a shell command and I have to
execute it. But before execute it, i have to ensure that there is not
a command in conflict with all the rules (like 'rm only inside this
directory, etc etc). For executing the command, I can't use system or
popen (I use execve). The rest is up to me.
Given
And that's when I'm begin to be really lost.
Because what you're being asked to do is implement security features and command parsing. Go look at the amount of code in SSH and bash.
Your OS comes with security features. SSH does authentication.
Don't try to reinvent those. You won't do it well - no one can. Look how long it's taken for bash and SSH to get where they are security-wise. (Hint: it's decades because there's literally decades of history and knowledge that were built into bash and SSH when they were first coded...)

Passing value to prompt open by an exe via batch file

I'm trying to use OpenGPG and when trying to decrypt something It opens up a prompt for the password. Now I'm trying to run this automatically therefore none to enter password. So My question is how do you pass in the password to this new prompt opened up by the exe I'm running form the batch file. Ive looked in gpg2.exe -help and there is no way to pass in the password as a parameter if anyone is familiar with OpenGPG or if there is a command I can run to pass the password into the new prompt, that would be great.
gpg2.exe -o output.txt -d series.txt.gpg
After many attempts at trying to get this working I, finally checked out the manual for gpg2.exe at http://linux.die.net/man/1/gpg2 and after adding the command line argument --batch the --passphrase is accepted by the application.
Not doing so results in the user being prompted.
Hope this helps anyone in the future attempting to do this hack.
echo password | gpg2.exe -o output.txt -d series.txt.gpg
GnuPG offers multiple ways to pass the passphrase non-interactively. Using the parameter --passphrase [password] is probably the most simple one, depending on your use case the others also could be of interest (for example if you do not want to store the passphrase within your application code).
From man gpg:
--passphrase-fd n
Read the passphrase from file descriptor n. Only the first line will be read
from file descriptor n. If you use 0 for n, the passphrase will be read from
STDIN. This can only be used if only one passphrase is supplied.
--passphrase-file file
Read the passphrase from file file. Only the first line will be read from
file file. This can only be used if only one passphrase is supplied. Obvi-
ously, a passphrase stored in a file is of questionable security if other
users can read this file. Don't use this option if you can avoid it.
--passphrase string
Use string as the passphrase. This can only be used if only one passphrase
is supplied. Obviously, this is of very questionable security on a multi-
user system. Don't use this option if you can avoid it.

How do applications read lines from stdin without consuming existing buffered data from a pipe?

Take the following command:
mysql -u root -p < load_data.sql > output.tab
The -p flag tells the mysql client - a C program - to provide the user with an interactive prompt to enter the password.
AFAIK, input like this is typically handled by writing a prompt to stderr and then blocking on a call like gets, which reads a line from stdin.
But the shell has already opened the load_data.sql file and set the stdin of the mysql client to its file descriptor - so shouldn't calling gets just get the first line from the file?
My initial thought was that the program seeks to the end before reading a line - but you can't seek like that on pipes!
So how does this work? Is there some magic?
Applications that prompt for passwords generally don't actually read them from stdin, on the grounds that this would (a) cause the password to appear on the screen if it was being typed in interactively and (b) encourage plain-text passwords to be bandied around in publicly-visible places when things need to be automated (e.g. in command lines visible to others via ps). PostgreSQL's psql SQL shell opens the terminal device directly, and I suspect mysql will do the same.
Some quick searching found this related question. The top-rated answer mentions the GNU function getpass(), which does indeed open a direct connection to the terminal, bypassing stdin. I suspect that function is what most password-prompting programs use in *nix.
This isn't a pipe that's being opened up, but rather is a redirection of stdin to point to a file. Thus you have both a FILE* (i.e. a stream), as well as a normal file-descriptor you can work with. In the case of the lower-level file-descriptor, there are seeking operations you can do, like lseek(), etc. that can be used along with read() in order to move around the file.
If you are wanting to still read data from the controlling terminal while stdin has been re-directed to a file, you simply need to open the controlling terminal for reading on another file-descriptor. You can use ctermid() in order to determine what the controlling terminal for your process is, and reopen it on another file-descriptor.

How do I add an operator to Bash in Linux?

I'd like to add an operator ( e.g. ^> ) to handle prepend instead append (>>). Do I need to modify Bash source or is there an easier way (plugin, etc)?
First of all, you'd need to modify bash sources and quite heavily. Because, above all, your ^> would be really hard to implement.
Note that bash redirection operators usually do a very simple writes, and work on a single file (or program in case of pipes) only. Excluding very specific solutions, you usually can't write to a beginning of a file for the very simple reason you'd need to move all remaining contents forward after each write. You could try doing that but it will be hard, very ineffective (since every write will require re-writing the whole file) and very unsafe (since with any error you will end up with random mix of old and new version).
That said, you are indeed probably better off with a function or any other solution which would use a temporary file, like others suggested.
For completeness, my own implementation of that:
prepend() {
local tmp=$(tempfile)
if cat - "${1}" > "${tmp}"; then
mv "${tmp}" "${1}"
else
rm -f "${tmp}"
# some error reporting
fi
}
Note that you unlike #jpa suggested, you should be writing the concatenated data to a temporary file as that operation can fail and if it does, you don't want to lose your original file. Afterwards, you just replace the old file with new one, or delete the temporary file and handle the failure any way you like.
Synopsis the same as with the other solution:
echo test | prepend file.txt
And a bit modified version to retain permissions and play safe with symlinks (if that is necessary) like >> does:
prepend() {
local tmp=$(tempfile)
if cat - "${1}" > "${tmp}"; then
cat "${tmp}" > "${1}"
rm -f "${tmp}"
else
rm -f "${tmp}"
# some error reporting
fi
}
Just note that this version is actually less safe since if during second cat something else will write to disk and fill it up, you'll end up with incomplete file.
To be honest, I wouldn't personally use it but handle symlinks and resetting permissions externally, if necessary.
^ is a poor choice of character, as it is already used in history substitution.
To add a new redirection type to the shell grammar, start in parse.y. Declare it as a new %token so that it may be used, add it to STRING_INT_ALIST other_token_alist[] so that it may appear in output (such as error messages), update the redirection rule in the parser, and update the lexer to emit this token upon encountering the appropriate characters.
command.h contains enum r_instruction of redirection types, which will need to be extended. There's a giant switch statement in make_redirection in make_cmd.c processing redirection instructions, and the actual redirection is performed by functions throughout redir.c. Scattered throughout the rest of source code are various functions for printing, copying, and destroying pipelines, which may also need to be updated.
That's all! Bash isn't really that complex.
This doesn't discuss how to implement a prepending redirection, which will be difficult as the UNIX file API only provides for appending and overwriting. The only way to prepend to a file is to rewrite it entirely, which (as other answers mention) is significantly more complex than any existing shell redirections.
Might be quite difficult to add an operator, but perhaps a function could be enough?
function prepend { tmp=`tempfile`; cp $1 $tmp; cat - $tmp > $1; rm $tmp; }
Example use:
echo foobar | prepend file.txt
prepends the text "foobar" to file.txt.
I think bash's plugin architecture (loading shared objects via the 'enable' built-in command) is limited to providing additional built-in commands. The redirection operators are part of they syntax for running simple commands, so I think you would need to modify the parser to recognize and handle your new ^> operator.
Most Linux filesystems do not support prepending. In fact, I don't know of any one that has a stable userspace interface for it. So, as stated by others already, you can only rely on overwriting, either just the initial parts, or the entire file, depending on your needs.
You can easily (partially) overwrite initial file contents in Bash, without truncating the file:
exec {fd}<>"$filename"
printf 'New initial contents' >$fd
exec {fd}>&-
Above, $fd is the file descriptor automatically allocated by Bash, and $filename is the name of the target file. Bash opens a new read-write file descriptor to the target file on the first line; this does not truncate the file. The second line overwrites the initial part of the file. The position in the file advances, so you can use multiple commands to overwrite consecutive parts in the file. The third line closes the descriptor; since there is only a limited number available to each process, you want to close them after you no longer need them, or a long-running script might run out.
Please note that > does less than you expected:
Remove the > and the following word from the commandline, remembering the redirection.
When the commandline is processed and the command can be launched, calling fork(2) (or clone(2)), to create a new process.
Modify the new process according to the command. That includes things like modified environment variables (SOMEVAR=foo yourcommand), but also changed filedescriptors. At this point, a > yourfile from the cmdline will have the effect that the file is open(2)'ed at the stdout filedescriptor (that is #1) in write-only mode truncating the file to zero bytes. A >> yourfile would have the effect that the file is oppend at stdout in write-only mode and append mode.
(Only now launch the program, like execv(yourprogram, yourargs)
The redirections could, for a simple example, be implemented like
open(yourfile, O_WRONLY|O_TRUNC);
or
open(yourfile, O_WRONLY|O_APPEND);
respectively.
The program then launched will have the correct environment set up, and can happily write to fd1. From here, the shell is not involved. The real work is not done by the shell, but by the operating system. As Unix doesn't have a prepend mode (and it would be impossible to integrate that feature correctly), everything you could try would end up in a very lousy hack.
Try to re-think your requirements, there's always a simpler way around.

Resources