Bug 1465078

Summary:	commandline options handling flaws
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7	Reporter:	Karel Volný <kvolny>
Component:	iptables	Assignee:	Phil Sutter <psutter>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Jiri Peska <jpeska>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	7.4	CC:	aloughla, atragler, iptables-maint-list, todoleza
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	iptables-1.4.21-27.el7	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Clones:	1655128 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2018-10-30 09:38:43 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1472751, 1655128

Description Karel Volný 2017-06-26 15:33:13 UTC

Description of problem:
When trying the new -W option, I have found some flaws handling the commandline.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
iptables-1.4.21-18.el7

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. iptables-restore -W
2. iptables-restore -W 0
3. iptables-restore --nonsense

Actual results:
1. # iptables-restore -W
dsfds
iptables-restore: line 1 failed

2. # iptables-restore -W 0
dssf
iptables-restore: line 1 failed

3. # iptables-restore --nonsense
iptables-restore: unrecognized option '--nonsense'
dsdsf
iptables-restore: line 1 failed

Expected results:
1. an error about missing value should be reported, program should exit without processing input

2. from man - "This option only works with -w." - so an error about missing "-w" should be reported and the program should exit without processing input

Plus I am not sure what sense makes setting this to 0, probably it should be rejected?

3. similar as above, the program should exit without processing input

While such behaviour isn't explicitly defined in manpage, it is a good practice not to continue processing when the options are wrong. Imagine e.g. if someone would like to use '--test' but made a typo, so that the option would be unrecognized and the undesired action performed ...

Comment 3 Phil Sutter 2017-09-20 17:41:06 UTC

Ignoring unknown parameters has been fixed by following upstream commit:

commit d89dc47ab3875f6fe6679cebceccd2000bf81b8e
Author: Vincent Bernat <vincent>
Date:   Sat Apr 15 12:16:47 2017 +0200

    iptables-restore/save: exit when given an unknown option
    
    When an unknown option is given, iptables-restore should exit instead of
    continue its operation. For example, if `--table` was misspelled, this
    could lead to an unwanted change. Moreover, exit with a status code of
    1. Make the same change for iptables-save.
    
    OTOH, exit with a status code of 0 when requesting help.
    
    Signed-off-by: Vincent Bernat <vincent>
    Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo>


Patches fixing the parsing issues of wait-interval option have been sent upstream: https://marc.info/?l=netfilter-devel&m=150592888910234&w=2

I decided to not forbid '-W 0' since it is not invalid per se - if specified, xtables_lock() routine will busy loop until the lock could be acquired.

Comment 4 Phil Sutter 2017-10-06 15:40:17 UTC

Upstream accepted my patches:

commit 60e0ffd365a2d936b3df13c1289b2ef57b756d92
Author: Phil Sutter <phil>
Date:   Wed Sep 20 19:34:35 2017 +0200

    ip{,6}tables-restore: Don't ignore missing wait-interval value
    
    Passing -W without a value doesn't make sense so bail out if none was
    given.
    
    Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil>
    Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo>

commit 21ba5b3874fb3d0c4cccc9b59f65c8df575211e2
Author: Phil Sutter <phil>
Date:   Wed Sep 20 19:34:36 2017 +0200

    ip{,6}tables-restore: Don't accept wait-interval without wait
    
    If -W <val> was given, error out if -w wasn't since that doesn't make
    sense.
    
    Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil>
    Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo>

Comment 10 errata-xmlrpc 2018-10-30 09:38:43 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:3093