PEP 706 – Filter for tarfile.extractall
- Author:
- Petr Viktorin <encukou at gmail.com>
- Discussions-To:
- Discourse thread
- Status:
- Final
- Type:
- Standards Track
- Created:
- 09-Feb-2023
- Python-Version:
- 3.12
- Post-History:
- 25-Jan-2023, 15-Feb-2023
- Resolution:
- Discourse message
Abstract
The extraction methods in tarfile
gain a filter
argument,
which allows rejecting files or modifying metadata as the archive is extracted.
Three built-in named filters are provided, aimed at limiting features that
might be surprising or dangerous.
These can be used as-is, or serve as a base for custom filters.
After a deprecation period, a strict (but safer) filter will become the default.
Motivation
The tar
format is used for several use cases, many of which have different
needs. For example:
- A backup of a UNIX workstation should faithfully preserve all kinds of details like file permissions, symlinks to system configuration, and various kinds of special files.
- When unpacking a data bundle, it’s much more important that the unpacking will not have unintended consequences – like exposing a password file by symlinking it to a public place.
To support all its use cases, the tar
format has many features.
In many cases, it’s best to ignore or disallow some of them when extracting
an archive.
Python allows extracting tar
archives using
tarfile.TarFile.extractall()
, whose docs warn to
never extract archives from untrusted sources without prior inspection.
However, it’s not clear what kind of inspection should be done.
Indeed, it’s quite tricky to do such an inspection correctly.
As a result, many people don’t bother, or do the check incorrectly, resulting in
security issues such as CVE-2007-4559.
Since tarfile
was first written, it’s become more
accepted that warnings in documentation are not enough.
Whenever possible, an unsafe operation should be explicitly requested;
potentially dangerous operations should look dangerous.
However, TarFile.extractall
looks benign in a code review.
Tarfile extraction is also exposed via shutil.unpack_archive()
,
which allows the user to not care about the kind of archive they’re
dealing with.
The API is very inviting for extracting archives without prior inspection,
even though the docs again warn against it.
It has been argued that Python is not wrong – it behaves exactly as documented – but that’s beside the point. Let’s improve the situation rather than assign/avoid blame. Python and its docs are the best place to improve things.
Rationale
How do we improve things?
Unfortunately, we will need to change the defaults, which implies
breaking backwards compatibility. TarFile.extractall
is what people reach for when they need to extract a tarball.
Its default behaviour needs to change.
What would be the best behaviour? That depends on the use case. So, we’ll add several general “policies” to control extraction. They are based on use cases, and ideally they should have straightforward security implications:
- Current behavior: trusting the archive. Suitable e.g. as a building block for libraries that do the check themselves, or extracting an archive you just made yourself.
- Unpacking a UNIX archive: roughly following GNU
tar
, e.g. stripping leading/
from filenames. - Unpacking a general data archive: the
shutil.unpack_archive()
use case, where it’s not important to preserve details specific totar
or Unix-like filesystems.
After a deprecation period, the last option – the most limited but most secure one – will become the default.
Even with better general defaults, users should still verify the archives they extract, and perhaps modify some of the metadata. Superficially, the following looks like a reasonable way to do this today:
- Call
TarFile.getmembers
- Verify or modify each member’s
TarInfo
- Pass the result to
extractall
’smembers
However, there are some issues with this approach:
- It’s possible to modify
TarInfo
objects, but the changes to them affect all subsequent operations on the sameTarFile
object. This behavior is fine for most uses, but despite that, it would be very surprising ifTarFile.extractall
did this by default. - Calling
getmembers
can be expensive and it requires a seekable archive. - When verifying members in advance, it may be necessary to track how each member would have changed the filesystem, e.g. how symlinks are being set up. This is hard. We can’t expect users to do it.
To solve these issues we’ll:
- Provide a supported way to “clone” and modify
TarInfo
objects. Areplace
method, similar todataclasses.replace()
ornamedtuple._replace
should do the trick. - Provide a “filter” hook in
extractall
’s loop that can modify or discard members before they are processed. - Require that this hook is called just before extracting each member, so it can scan the current state of the disk. This will greatly simplify the implementation of policies (both in stdlib and user code), at the cost of not being able to do a precise “dry run”.
The hook API will be very similar to the existing filter
argument
for TarFile.add
.
We’ll also name it filter
.
(In some cases “policy” would be a more fitting name,
but the API can be used for more than security policies.)
The built-in policies/filters described above will be implemented using the public filter API, so they can be used as building blocks or examples.
Setting a precedent
If and when other libraries for archive extraction, such as zipfile
,
gain similar functionality, they should mimic this API as much as it’s
reasonable.
To enable this for simple cases, the built-in filters will have string names;
e.g. users can pass filter='data'
instead of a specific function that deals
with TarInfo
objects.
The shutil.unpack_archive()
function will get a
filter
argument, which it will pass to extractall
.
Adding function-based API that would work across archive formats is out of scope of this PEP.
Full disclosure & redistributor info
The PEP author works for Red Hat, a redistributor of Python with different security needs and support periods than CPython in general. Such redistributors may want to carry vendor patches to:
- Allow configuring the defaults system-wide, and
- Change the default as soon as possible, even in older Python versions.
The proposal makes this easy to do, and it allows users to query the settings.
Specification
Modifying and forgetting member metadata
The TarInfo
class will gain a new method,
replace()
, which will work similarly to dataclasses.replace
.
It will return a copy of the TarInfo
object with attributes
replaced as specified by keyword-only arguments:
name
mtime
mode
linkname
uid
gid
uname
gname
Any of these, except name
and linkname
, will be allowed to be set
to None
.
When extract
or extractall
encounters such a None
, it will not
set that piece of metadata.
(If uname
or gname
is None
, it will fall back to uid
or gid
as if the name wasn’t found.)
When addfile
or tobuf
encounters such a None
, it will raise a
ValueError
.
When list
encounters such a None
, it will print a placeholder string.
The documentation will mention why the method is there:
TarInfo
objects retrieved from TarFile.getmembers
are “live”; modifying them directly will affect subsequent unrelated
operations.
Filters
TarFile.extract
and
TarFile.extractall
methods
will grow a filter
keyword-only parameter,
which takes a callable that can be called as:
filter(/, member: TarInfo, path: str) -> TarInfo|None
where member
is the member to be extracted, and path
is the path to
where the archive is extracted (i.e., it’ll be the same for every member).
When used it will be called on each member as it is extracted,
and extraction will work with the result.
If it returns None
, the member will be skipped.
The function can also raise an exception.
This can, depending on TarFile.errorlevel
,
abort the extraction or cause the member to be skipped.
Note
If extraction is aborted, the archive may be left partially extracted. It is the user’s responsibility to clean up.
We will also provide a set of defaults for common use cases.
In addition to a function, the filter
argument can be one
of the following strings:
'fully_trusted'
: Current behavior: honor the metadata as is. Should be used if the user trusts the archive completely, or implements their own complex verification.'tar'
: Roughly follow defaults of the GNUtar
command (when run as a normal user):- Strip leading
'/'
andos.sep
from filenames - Refuse to extract files with absolute paths (after the
/
stripping above, e.g.C:/foo
on Windows). - Refuse to extract files whose absolute path (after following symlinks)
would end up outside the destination.
(Note that GNU
tar
instead delays creating some links.) - Clear high mode bits (setuid, setgid, sticky) and group/other write bits
(
S_IWGRP|S_IWOTH
). (This is an approximation of GNUtar
’s default, which limits the mode by the currentumask
setting.)
- Strip leading
'data'
: Extract a “data” archive, disallowing common attack vectors but limiting functionality. In particular, many features specific to UNIX-style filesystems (or equivalently, to thetar
archive format) are ignored, making this a good filter for cross-platform archives. In addition totar
:- Refuse to extract links (hard or soft) that link to absolute paths.
- Refuse to extract links (hard or soft) which end up linking to a path
outside of the destination.
(On systems that don’t support links,
tarfile
will, in most cases, fall back to creating regular files. This proposal doesn’t change that behaviour.) - Refuse to extract device files (including pipes).
- For regular files and hard links:
- Set the owner read and write permissions (
S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR
). - Remove the group & other executable permission (
S_IXGRP|S_IXOTH
) if the owner doesn’t have it (S_IXUSR
).
- Set the owner read and write permissions (
- For other files (directories), ignore mode entirely (set it to
None
). - Ignore user and group info (set
uid
,gid
,uname
,gname
toNone
).
Any other string will cause a ValueError
.
The corresponding filter functions will be available as
tarfile.fully_trusted_filter()
, tarfile.tar_filter()
, etc., so
they can be easily used in custom policies.
Note that these filters never return None
.
Skipping members this way is a feature for user-defined filters.
Defaults and their configuration
TarFile
will gain a new attribute,
extraction_filter
, to allow configuring the default filter.
By default it will be None
, but users can set it to a callable
that will be used if the filter
argument is missing or None
.
Note
String names won’t be accepted here. That would encourage code like
my_tarfile.extraction_filter = 'data'
.
On Python versions without this feature, this would do nothing,
silently ignoring a security-related request.
If both the argument and attribute are None
:
- In Python 3.12-3.13, a
DeprecationWarning
will be emitted and extraction will use the'fully_trusted'
filter. - In Python 3.14+, it will use the
'data'
filter.
Applications and system integrators may wish to change extraction_filter
of the TarFile
class itself to set a global default.
When using a function, they will generally want to wrap it in staticmethod()
to prevent injection of a self
argument.
Subclasses of TarFile
can also override extraction_filter
.
FilterError
A new exception, FilterError
, will be added to the tarfile
module.
It’ll have several new subclasses, one for each of the refusal reasons above.
FilterError
’s member
attribute will contain the relevant TarInfo
.
In the lists above, “refusing” to extract a file means that a FilterError
will be raised.
As with other extraction errors, if the TarFile.errorlevel
is 1 or more, this will abort the extraction; with errorlevel=0
the error
will be logged and the member will be ignored, but extraction will continue.
Note that extractall()
may leave the archive partially extracted;
it is the user’s responsibility to clean up.
Errorlevel, and fatal/non-fatal errors
Currently, TarFile
has an errorlevel
argument/attribute, which specifies how errors are handled:
- With
errorlevel=0
, documentation says that “all errors are ignored when usingextract()
andextractall()
”. The code only ignores non-fatal and fatal errors (see below), so, for example, you still getTypeError
if you passNone
as the destination path. - With
errorlevel=1
(the default), all non-fatal errors are ignored. (They may be logged tosys.stderr
by setting the debug argument/attribute.) Which errors are non-fatal is not defined in documentation, but code treatsExtractionError
as such. Specifically, it’s these issues:- “unable to resolve link inside archive” (raised on systems that do not support symlinks)
- “fifo/special devices not supported by system” (not used for failures if
the system supports these, e.g. for a
PermissionError
) - “could not change owner/mode/modification time”
Note that, for example, file name too long or out of disk space don’t qualify. The non-fatal errors are not very likely to appear on a Unix-like system.
- With
errorlevel=2
, all errors are raised, including fatal ones. Which errors are fatal is, again, not defined; in practice it’sOSError
.
A filter refusing to extract a member does not fit neatly into the fatal/non-fatal categories.
- This PEP does not change existing behavior. (Ideas for improvements are welcome in Discourse topic 25970.)
- When a filter refuses to extract a member, the error should not pass silently by default.
To satisfy this, FilterError
will be considered a fatal error, that is,
it’ll be ignored only with errorlevel=0
.
Users that want to ignore FilterError
but not other fatal errors should
create a custom filter function, and call another filter in a try
block.
Hints for further verification
Even with the proposed changes, tarfile
will not be
suited for extracting untrusted files without prior inspection.
Among other issues, the proposed policies don’t prevent denial-of-service
attacks.
Users should do additional checks.
New docs will tell users to consider:
- extracting to a new empty directory,
- using external (e.g. OS-level) limits on disk, memory and CPU usage,
- checking filenames against an allow-list of characters (to filter out control characters, confusables, etc.),
- checking that filenames have expected extensions (discouraging files that execute when you “click on them”, or extension-less files like Windows special device names),
- limiting the number of extracted files, total size of extracted data, and size of individual files,
- checking for files that would be shadowed on case-insensitive filesystems.
Also, the docs will note that:
- tar files commonly contain multiple versions of the same file: later ones are expected to overwrite earlier ones on extraction,
tarfile
does not protect against issues with “live” data, e.g. an attacker tinkering with the destination directory while extracting (or adding) is going on (see the GNU tar manual for more info).
This list is not comprehensive, but the documentation is a good place to
collect such general tips.
It can be moved into a separate document if grows too long or if it needs to
be consolidated with zipfile
or shutil
(which is out of scope for this proposal).
TarInfo identity, and offset
With filters that use replace()
, the TarInfo
objects handled
by the extraction machinery will not necessarily be the same objects
as those present in members
.
This may affect TarInfo
subclasses that override methods like
makelink
and rely on object identity.
Such code can switch to comparing offset
, the position of the member
header inside the file.
Note that both the overridable methods and offset
are only
documented in source comments.
tarfile CLI
The CLI (python -m tarfile
) will gain a --filter
option
that will take the name of one of the provided default filters.
It won’t be possible to specify a custom filter function.
If --filter
is not given, the CLI will use the default filter
('fully_trusted'
with a deprecation warning now, and 'data'
from
Python 3.14 on).
There will be no short option. (-f
would be confusingly similar to
the filename option of GNU tar
.)
Other archive libraries
If and when other archive libraries, such as zipfile
,
grow similar functionality, their extraction functions should use a filter
argument that takes, at least, the strings 'fully_trusted'
(which should
disable any security precautions) and 'data'
(which should avoid features
that might surprise users).
Standardizing a function-based filter API is out of scope of this PEP.
Shutil
shutil.unpack_archive()
will gain a filter
argument.
If it’s given, it will be passed to the underlying extraction function.
Passing it for a zip
archive will fail for now (until zipfile
gains a filter
argument, if it ever does).
If filter
is not specified (or left as None
), it won’t be passed
on, so extracting a tarball will use the default filter
('fully_trusted'
with a deprecation warning now, and 'data'
from
Python 3.14 on).
Complex filters
Note that some user-defined filters need, for example,
to count extracted members of do post-processing.
This requires a more complex API than a filter
callable.
However, that complex API need not be exposed to tarfile
.
For example, with a hypothetical StatefulFilter
users would write:
with StatefulFilter() as filter_func:
my_tar.extract(path, filter=filter_func)
A simple StatefulFilter
example will be added to the docs.
Note
The need for stateful filters is a reason against allowing
registration of custom filter names in addition to 'fully_trusted'
,
'tar'
and 'data'
.
With such a mechanism, API for (at least) set-up and tear-down would need
to be set in stone.
Backwards Compatibility
The default behavior of TarFile.extract
and TarFile.extractall
will change, after raising DeprecationWarning
for 2 releases
(shortest deprecation period allowed in Python’s
backwards compatibility policy).
Additionally, code that relies on tarfile.TarInfo
object identity may break, see TarInfo identity, and offset.
Backporting & Forward Compatibility
This feature may be backported to older versions of Python.
In CPython, we don’t add warnings to patch releases, so the default
filter should be changed to 'fully_trusted'
in backports.
Other than that, all of the changes to tarfile
should be backported, so
hasattr(tarfile, 'data_filter')
becomes a reliable check for all
of the new functionality.
Note that CPython’s usual policy is to avoid adding new APIs in security
backports.
This feature does not make sense without a new API
(TarFile.extraction_filter
and the filter
argument),
so we’ll make an exception.
(See Discourse comment 23149/16
for details.)
Here are examples of code that takes into account that tarfile
may or may
not have the proposed feature.
When copying these snippets, note that setting extraction_filter
will affect subsequent operations.
- Fully trusted archive:
my_tarfile.extraction_filter = (lambda member, path: member) my_tarfile.extractall()
- Use the
'data'
filter if available, but revert to Python 3.11 behavior ('fully_trusted'
) if this feature is not available:my_tarfile.extraction_filter = getattr(tarfile, 'data_filter', (lambda member, path: member)) my_tarfile.extractall()
(This is an unsafe operation, so it should be spelled out explicitly, ideally with a comment.)
- Use the
'data'
filter; fail if it is not available:my_tarfile.extractall(filter=tarfile.data_filter)
or:
my_tarfile.extraction_filter = tarfile.data_filter my_tarfile.extractall()
- Use the
'data'
filter; warn if it is not available:if hasattr(tarfile, 'data_filter'): my_tarfile.extractall(filter='data') else: # remove this when no longer needed warn_the_user('Extracting may be unsafe; consider updating Python') my_tarfile.extractall()
Security Implications
This proposal improves security, at the expense of backwards compatibility. In particular, it will help users avoid CVE-2007-4559.
How to Teach This
The API, usage notes and tips for further verification will be added to the documentation. These should be usable for users who are familiar with archives in general, but not with the specifics of UNIX filesystems nor the related security issues.
Reference Implementation
See pull request #102953 on GitHub.
Rejected Ideas
SafeTarFile
An initial idea from Lars Gustäbel was to provide a separate class that implements security checks (see gh-65308). There are two major issues with this approach:
- The name is misleading. General archive operations can never be made “safe” from all kinds of unwanted behavior, without impacting legitimate use cases.
- It does not solve the problem of unsafe defaults.
However, many of the ideas behind SafeTarFile were reused in this PEP.
Add absolute_path option to tarfile
Issue gh-73974 asks for adding an absolute_path
option to extraction
methods. This would be a minimal change to formally resolve CVE-2007-4559.
It doesn’t go far enough to protect the unaware, nor to empower the diligent
and curious.
Other names for the 'tar'
filter
The 'tar'
filter exposes features specific to UNIX-like filesystems,
so it could be named 'unix'
.
Or 'unix-like'
, 'nix'
, '*nix'
, 'posix'
?
Feature-wise, tar format and UNIX-like filesystem are essentially
equivalent, so tar
is a good name.
Possible Further Work
Adding filters to zipfile and shutil.unpack_archive
For consistency, zipfile
and
shutil.unpack_archive()
could gain support
for a filter
argument.
However, this would require research that this PEP’s author can’t promise
for Python 3.12.
Filters for zipfile
would probably not help security.
Zip is used primarily for cross-platform data bundles, and correspondingly,
ZipFile.extract
’s defaults
are already similar to what a 'data'
filter would do.
A 'fully_trusted'
filter, which would newly allow absolute paths and
..
path components, might not be useful for much except
a unified unpack_archive
API.
Filters should be useful for use cases other than security, but those
would usually need custom filter functions, and those would need API that works
with both TarInfo
and
ZipInfo
.
That is definitely out of scope of this PEP.
If only this PEP is implemented and nothing changes for zipfile
,
the effect for callers of unpack_archive
is that the default
for tar files is changing from 'fully_trusted'
to
the more appropriate 'data'
.
In the interim period, Python 3.12-3.13 will emit DeprecationWarning
.
That’s annoying, but there are several ways to handle it: e.g. add a
filter
argument conditionally, set TarFile.extraction_filter
globally, or ignore/suppress the warning until Python 3.14.
Also, since many calls to unpack_archive
are likely to be unsafe,
there’s hope that the DeprecationWarning
will often turn out to be
a helpful hint to review affected code.
Thanks
This proposal is based on prior work and discussions by many people, in particular Lars Gustäbel, Gregory P. Smith, Larry Hastings, Joachim Wagner, Jan Matejek, Jakub Wilk, Daniel Garcia, Lumír Balhar, Miro Hrončok, and many others.
Copyright
This document is placed in the public domain or under the CC0-1.0-Universal license, whichever is more permissive.
Source: https://github.com/python/peps/blob/main/peps/pep-0706.rst
Last modified: 2023-09-09 17:39:29 GMT