RFR(S) 8160987: JDWP ClassType.InvokeMethod doesn't validate class

Mon Sep 19 17:46:09 UTC 2016

Will do.

Thanks! Harold

On 9/19/2016 1:26 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> Harold,
>
> Please, add space after comma at 356 and 362
>
> $0.2
> -Dmitry
>
>
> On 2016-09-19 20:07, harold seigel wrote:
>> Thanks Serguei.  I'll make that change before checking in the fix.
>>
>> Harold
>>
>>
>> On 9/19/2016 12:55 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>> Hi Harold,
>>>
>>> 351 static jvmtiError check_methodClass(JNIEnv *env, jclass clazz,
>>> jmethodID method)
>>> 352 {
>>> 353 jclass containing_class;
>>> 354 jvmtiError error;
>>> 355
>>> 356 error = JVMTI_FUNC_PTR(gdata->jvmti,GetMethodDeclaringClass)
>>> 357 (gdata->jvmti, method, &containing_class);
>>>    It is better to initialize containing_class with NULL. Otherwise, it
>>> looks good. Thanks for taking care about this issue! Serguei On
>>> 9/19/16 05:51, harold seigel wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please review this updated webrev for fixing JDK-8160987
>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160987>:
>>>>
>>>>      http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hseigel/bug_8160987.2/
>>>>
>>>> It provides a more efficient implementation and fixes a test
>>>> problem.  This fix was tested as described below and with the JTReg
>>>> JDK com/sun/jdi tests.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Harold
>>>>
>>>> On 9/16/2016 10:32 AM, harold seigel wrote:
>>>>> Hi Serguei, Thanks for the suggestion!  That provides a much cleaner
>>>>> implementation. Harold On 9/15/2016 11:28 PM,
>>>>> serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/15/16 19:13, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>> On 16/09/2016 8:52 AM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Harold, I did not got deep into the fix yet but wonder why the
>>>>>>>> JVMTI function is
>>>>>> My copy-paste failed. I wanted to list the JVMTI function name:
>>>>>> GetMethodDeclaringClass. Thanks, Serguei
>>>>>>>> not used.
>>>>>>> I was wondering a similar thing. It seems very heavyweight to use
>>>>>>> Java level reflection from inside native code to validate the
>>>>>>> native "handles" passed to that native code. I would have expected
>>>>>>> a way to go from a MethodId to the declaring class of the method,
>>>>>>> and a simple way to test if there is an ancestor relation between
>>>>>>> the two classes.
>>>>>>>> On 9/15/16 13:05, harold seigel wrote:
>>>>>>>>> One could argue that a spec compliant JNI implementation
>>>>>>>>> wouldn't need this change in the first place... Regardless, I'm
>>>>>>>>> withdrawing this change because I found that it fails a
>>>>>>>>> com/sun/jdi JTreg test involving static methods in interfaces.
>>>>>>> I find it both intriguing and worrying that ClassType.InvokeMethod
>>>>>>> refers to superinterfaces when prior to 8 (and this spec was not
>>>>>>> updated in this area) static interface methods did not exist! The
>>>>>>> main changes were in the definition of InterfaceType.InvokeMethod.
>>>>>>> I wonder whether invocation of static interface methods via
>>>>>>> ClassType.InvokeMethod is actually tested directly? I realize the
>>>>>>> specs are a bit of a minefield when it comes to what is required
>>>>>>> by the different specs and what is implemented in hotspot.
>>>>>>> Unfortunately it is a minefield I also have to wade through for
>>>>>>> private interface methods. In many cases it is not clear what
>>>>>>> should happen and all we have to guide us is what hotspot does (eg
>>>>>>> "virtual" invocations on non-virtual methods). David -----
>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Harold On 9/15/2016 3:37 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/15/16 12:10 PM, harold seigel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> (Adding hotspot-runtime) Hi Dan, Thanks for looking at this. I
>>>>>>>>>>> could pass NULL instead of clazz to ToReflectMethod() to
>>>>>>>>>>> ensure that the method object isn't being obtained from clazz.
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think that would be a JNI spec compliant use of the JNI
>>>>>>>>>> ToReflectedMethod() function. That would be relying on the fact
>>>>>>>>>> that HotSpot doesn't use the clazz parameter to convert
>>>>>>>>>> {clazz,jmethodID} => method_object. Sorry... again... Dan
>>>>>>>>>>> Harold On 9/15/2016 1:09 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/15/16 9:31 AM, harold seigel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Please review this small fix for JDK-8160987.  The JDWP
>>>>>>>>>>>>> InvokeStatic() method was depending on the JNI function that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it called to enforce the requirement that the specified
>>>>>>>>>>>>> method must be a member of the specified class or one of its
>>>>>>>>>>>>> super classes. But, JNI does not enforce this requirement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This fix adds code to JDWP to do its own check that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> specified method is a member of the specified class or one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of its super classes. JBS Bug:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160987 Open
>>>>>>>>>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hseigel/bug_8160987/
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/jdk.jdwp.agent/share/native/libjdwp/invoker.c     Sorry I
>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't think of this comment during the pre-review...     The
>>>>>>>>>>>> only "strange" part of this fix is:     L374:     /* Get the
>>>>>>>>>>>> method object from the method's jmethodID. */     L375:
>>>>>>>>>>>> method_object = JNI_FUNC_PTR(env,ToReflectedMethod)(env,
>>>>>>>>>>>> L376: clazz,     L377: method,     L378: JNI_TRUE /* isStatic
>>>>>>>>>>>> */);     L379:     if (method_object == NULL) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> L380:         return JVMTI_ERROR_NONE; /* Bad jmethodID ?
>>>>>>>>>>>> This will be handled elsewhere */     L381:     }     Here we
>>>>>>>>>>>> are using parameter 'clazz' to find the method_object for
>>>>>>>>>>>> parameter 'method' so that we can validate that 'clazz'
>>>>>>>>>>>> refers to     method's class or superclass.     When a bogus
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'clazz' value is passed in by a JCK test, the only     reason
>>>>>>>>>>>> that JNI ToReflectedMethod() can still find the right
>>>>>>>>>>>> method_object is that our (HotSpot) implementation of JNI
>>>>>>>>>>>> ToReflectedMethod() doesn't really require the 'clazz'
>>>>>>>>>>>> parameter     to find the right method_object. So the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'method_object' that we     return is the real one which has
>>>>>>>>>>>> a 'clazz' field that doesn't     match the 'clazz' parameter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>      Wow does that twist your head around or what?     So
>>>>>>>>>>>> we're trusting JNI ToReflectedMethod() to return the right
>>>>>>>>>>>>      method_object when we give it a potentially bad 'clazz'
>>>>>>>>>>>> value.     So should we use JNI FromReflectedMethod() to
>>>>>>>>>>>> convert the     method_object back into a jmethodID and
>>>>>>>>>>>> verify that jmethodID     matches the one that we passed to
>>>>>>>>>>>> check_methodClass()? I might be too paranoid here so feel
>>>>>>>>>>>> free to say that enough is enough with this fix. Thumbs up! Dan
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fix was tested with the two failing JCK vm/jdwp tests
>>>>>>>>>>>>> listed in the bug, the JCK Lang, VM, and API tests, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hotspot JTReg tests, the java/lang, java/util and other
>>>>>>>>>>>>> JTReg tests, the co-located and non-colocated NSK tests, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the RBT Tier2 tests. Thanks, Harold
>