Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

isUrl check causes infinite loop #109

Closed
pyhrus opened this issue Sep 11, 2012 · 8 comments
Closed

isUrl check causes infinite loop #109

pyhrus opened this issue Sep 11, 2012 · 8 comments

Comments

@pyhrus
Copy link

pyhrus commented Sep 11, 2012

Following code can be use to reproduce the infinite loop

var check = require('validator').check;

console.log('my pid ' + process.pid);

var str = 'http://www.google.com/url?testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&testing=testing&';

console.log('str length : ' + str.length);

check(str).isUrl(str);

MDB js stack

::jsstack
80475d8 0xfe632a3e
8047638 v8::internal::NativeRegExpMacroAssembler::Execute+0x6a
8047678 v8::internal::NativeRegExpMacroAssembler::Match+0x7e
80476e8 v8::internal::RegExpImpl::IrregexpExecRaw+0x124
8047738 v8::internal::RegExpImpl::IrregexpExec+0x6e
8047788 v8::internal::RegExpImpl::Exec+0x80
80477e8 v8::internal::Runtime_RegExpExec+0x133
8047808 0x4050a336 internal (Code: 4050a2c1)
804782c 0xfe632335 RegExpExecNoTests (26c2f0b5)
8047854 0xfe6321b1 match (26c2e1c1)
804786c 0xfe627560 (as module.exports.isUrl) (297aa561)
8047888 0x4050db41
80478b0 0x4052461e
80478d4 0xfe625725 (as Validator.(anonymous function)) (58a1ab35)
80478ec 0x4050db41
804790c 0xfe612d17 (as ) (297760ad)
8047940 0x40524625
8047978 0x40555b3b (as Module._compile) (26c46b55)
8047998 0x40555c19 (as Module._extensions..js) (26c46b95)
80479bc 0x40554cff (as Module.load) (26c46b0d)
80479fc 0x405547f3 (as Module._load) (26c46ac5)
8047a1c 0x40555f53 (as Module.runMain) (26c46c01)
8047a40 0x4052957c (as startup.processNextTick.process._tickCallback) (26c438d9)
8047a5c 0x40521c39
8047a98 0x40512c2a
8047b18 _ZN2v88internalL6InvokeEbNS0_6HandleINS0_10JSFunctionEEENS1_INS0_6ObjectEEEiPS5_Pb+0x101
8047b58 v8::internal::Execution::Call+0xc9
8047bb8 v8::Function::Call+0xf0
8047c38 _ZN4nodeL4TickEv+0xae
8047c58 uv__run_idle+0x37
8047c98 uv__run+0x23
8047ca8 uv_run+0x17
8047d08 node::Start+0x1c7
8047d28 main+0x1b
8047d48 _start+0x83

@Radagaisus
Copy link

Also, I think this part is wrong str.length > 2083 and should be str.length < 2083. URLs can't (practically) be bigger than ~2000 characters

@chriso
Copy link
Collaborator

chriso commented Sep 24, 2012

@shankar0306 it's a regular expression denial of service. Not sure what the best course of action is here beyond replacing the check with a parser that doesn't use regex.

@Radagaisus the isUrl() check fails if length > 2083. See #53 for the reasoning behind this.

@ralyodio
Copy link

I think limit of 2000 chars is reasonable: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/417142/what-is-the-maximum-length-of-a-url

@Radagaisus
Copy link

@chriso @chovy yep, I was misreading the code. The problem shankar mentioned is more serious though.

@corvi42
Copy link

corvi42 commented Oct 19, 2012

It would probably be more efficient to put the length > 2083 check before the regex. This way, the regex is never used for really long strings. I'm pretty sure that checking the length of the string is a faster operation than that really long & hairy regex.

@chriso
Copy link
Collaborator

chriso commented Oct 19, 2012

@corvi42 RegExp in V8 is fast enough that checks on urls of any length should be considered negligible. The DOS problem arrises from excessive backtracking.

@corvi42
Copy link

corvi42 commented Oct 19, 2012

@chriso I understand that the infinite loop issue is not from the performance of the regex, and I also appreciate that V8 is a mighty powerful machine. It was just a passing observation. In general I think its good style to fail fast, and avoid more costly operations when the code is functionally equivalent. Its really a very minor point, and I'm sure won't really affect anybody's code adversely either way. Do as you wish.

@corpix
Copy link

corpix commented Oct 28, 2012

I think that problem in the regexp used in the node-validator. If you delete "&" at the end of the url it will work fine.

Have you seen this https://gist.github.com/729294 ?
I have found it while searching for good javascript url validation regex and wrote little test(urls borrowed from this page http://mathiasbynens.be/demo/url-regex) for node.js https://github.com/corpix/dperini_isurl_test

EDIT: I have also added regex that used in node-validator at the moment of 0e391de

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants