2012-06-24 11:39:59 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "git-compat-util.h"
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "credential.h"
|
2012-06-24 11:39:59 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "builtin.h"
|
2020-10-15 21:59:20 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "config.h"
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static const char usage_msg[] =
|
2021-10-28 16:21:56 +00:00
|
|
|
"git credential (fill|approve|reject)";
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
|
builtins: mark unused prefix parameters
All builtins receive a "prefix" parameter, but it is only useful if they
need to adjust filenames given by the user on the command line. For
builtins that do not even call parse_options(), they often don't look at
the prefix at all, and -Wunused-parameter complains.
Let's annotate those to silence the compiler warning. I gave a quick
scan of each of these cases, and it seems like they don't have anything
they _should_ be using the prefix for (i.e., there is no hidden bug that
we are missing). The only questionable cases I saw were:
- in git-unpack-file, we create a tempfile which will always be at the
root of the repository, even if the command is run from a subdir.
Arguably this should be created in the subdir from which we're run
(as we report the path only as a relative name). However, nobody has
complained, and I'm hesitant to change something that is deep
plumbing going back to April 2005 (though I think within our
scripts, the sole caller in git-merge-one-file would be OK, as it
moves to the toplevel itself).
- in fetch-pack, local-filesystem remotes are taken as relative to the
project root, not the current directory. So:
git init server.git
[...put stuff in server.git...]
git init client.git
cd client.git
mkdir subdir
cd subdir
git fetch-pack ../../server.git ...
won't work, as we quietly move to the top of the repository before
interpreting the path (so "../server.git" would work). This is
weird, but again, nobody has complained and this is how it has
always worked. And this is how "git fetch" works, too. Plus it
raises questions about how a configured remote like:
git config remote.origin.url ../server.git
should behave. I can certainly come up with a reasonable set of
behavior, but it may not be worth stirring up complications in a
plumbing tool.
So I've left the behavior untouched in both of those cases. If anybody
really wants to revisit them, it's easy enough to drop the UNUSED
marker. This commit is just about removing them as obstacles to turning
on -Wunused-parameter all the time.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-03-28 20:56:55 +00:00
|
|
|
int cmd_credential(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix UNUSED)
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const char *op;
|
|
|
|
|
struct credential c = CREDENTIAL_INIT;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-15 21:59:20 +00:00
|
|
|
git_config(git_default_config, NULL);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-05-30 05:12:33 +00:00
|
|
|
if (argc != 2 || !strcmp(argv[1], "-h"))
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
usage(usage_msg);
|
2017-05-30 05:12:33 +00:00
|
|
|
op = argv[1];
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2024-04-17 00:02:40 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!strcmp(op, "capability")) {
|
|
|
|
|
credential_set_all_capabilities(&c, CREDENTIAL_OP_INITIAL);
|
|
|
|
|
credential_announce_capabilities(&c, stdout);
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
credential: gate new fields on capability
We support the new credential and authtype fields, but we lack a way to
indicate to a credential helper that we'd like them to be used. Without
some sort of indication, the credential helper doesn't know if it should
try to provide us a username and password, or a pre-encoded credential.
For example, the helper might prefer a more restricted Bearer token if
pre-encoded credentials are possible, but might have to fall back to
more general username and password if not.
Let's provide a simple way to indicate whether Git (or, for that matter,
the helper) is capable of understanding the authtype and credential
fields. We send this capability when we generate a request, and the
other side may reply to indicate to us that it does, too.
For now, don't enable sending capabilities for the HTTP code. In a
future commit, we'll introduce appropriate handling for that code,
which requires more in-depth work.
The logic for determining whether a capability is supported may seem
complex, but it is not. At each stage, we emit the capability to the
following stage if all preceding stages have declared it. Thus, if the
caller to git credential fill didn't declare it, then we won't send it
to the helper, and if fill's caller did send but the helper doesn't
understand it, then we won't send it on in the response. If we're an
internal user, then we know about all capabilities and will request
them.
For "git credential approve" and "git credential reject", we set the
helper capability before calling the helper, since we assume that the
input we're getting from the external program comes from a previous call
to "git credential fill", and thus we'll invoke send a capability to the
helper if and only if we got one from the standard input, which is the
correct behavior.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2024-04-17 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
if (credential_read(&c, stdin, CREDENTIAL_OP_INITIAL) < 0)
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
die("unable to read credential from stdin");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!strcmp(op, "fill")) {
|
credential: gate new fields on capability
We support the new credential and authtype fields, but we lack a way to
indicate to a credential helper that we'd like them to be used. Without
some sort of indication, the credential helper doesn't know if it should
try to provide us a username and password, or a pre-encoded credential.
For example, the helper might prefer a more restricted Bearer token if
pre-encoded credentials are possible, but might have to fall back to
more general username and password if not.
Let's provide a simple way to indicate whether Git (or, for that matter,
the helper) is capable of understanding the authtype and credential
fields. We send this capability when we generate a request, and the
other side may reply to indicate to us that it does, too.
For now, don't enable sending capabilities for the HTTP code. In a
future commit, we'll introduce appropriate handling for that code,
which requires more in-depth work.
The logic for determining whether a capability is supported may seem
complex, but it is not. At each stage, we emit the capability to the
following stage if all preceding stages have declared it. Thus, if the
caller to git credential fill didn't declare it, then we won't send it
to the helper, and if fill's caller did send but the helper doesn't
understand it, then we won't send it on in the response. If we're an
internal user, then we know about all capabilities and will request
them.
For "git credential approve" and "git credential reject", we set the
helper capability before calling the helper, since we assume that the
input we're getting from the external program comes from a previous call
to "git credential fill", and thus we'll invoke send a capability to the
helper if and only if we got one from the standard input, which is the
correct behavior.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2024-04-17 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_fill(&c, 0);
|
credential: add support for multistage credential rounds
Over HTTP, NTLM and Kerberos require two rounds of authentication on the
client side. It's possible that there are custom authentication schemes
that also implement this same approach. Since these are tricky schemes
to implement and the HTTP library in use may not always handle them
gracefully on all systems, it would be helpful to allow the credential
helper to implement them instead for increased portability and
robustness.
To allow this to happen, add a boolean flag, continue, that indicates
that instead of failing when we get a 401, we should retry another round
of authentication. However, this necessitates some changes in our
current credential code so that we can make this work.
Keep the state[] headers between iterations, but only use them to send
to the helper and only consider the new ones we read from the credential
helper to be valid on subsequent iterations. That avoids us passing
stale data when we finally approve or reject the credential. Similarly,
clear the multistage and wwwauth[] values appropriately so that we
don't pass stale data or think we're trying a multiround response when
we're not. Remove the credential values so that we can actually fill a
second time with new responses.
Limit the number of iterations of reauthentication we do to 3. This
means that if there's a problem, we'll terminate with an error message
instead of retrying indefinitely and not informing the user (and
possibly conducting a DoS on the server).
In our tests, handle creating multiple response output files from our
helper so we can verify that each of the messages sent is correct.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2024-04-17 00:02:37 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_next_state(&c);
|
credential: gate new fields on capability
We support the new credential and authtype fields, but we lack a way to
indicate to a credential helper that we'd like them to be used. Without
some sort of indication, the credential helper doesn't know if it should
try to provide us a username and password, or a pre-encoded credential.
For example, the helper might prefer a more restricted Bearer token if
pre-encoded credentials are possible, but might have to fall back to
more general username and password if not.
Let's provide a simple way to indicate whether Git (or, for that matter,
the helper) is capable of understanding the authtype and credential
fields. We send this capability when we generate a request, and the
other side may reply to indicate to us that it does, too.
For now, don't enable sending capabilities for the HTTP code. In a
future commit, we'll introduce appropriate handling for that code,
which requires more in-depth work.
The logic for determining whether a capability is supported may seem
complex, but it is not. At each stage, we emit the capability to the
following stage if all preceding stages have declared it. Thus, if the
caller to git credential fill didn't declare it, then we won't send it
to the helper, and if fill's caller did send but the helper doesn't
understand it, then we won't send it on in the response. If we're an
internal user, then we know about all capabilities and will request
them.
For "git credential approve" and "git credential reject", we set the
helper capability before calling the helper, since we assume that the
input we're getting from the external program comes from a previous call
to "git credential fill", and thus we'll invoke send a capability to the
helper if and only if we got one from the standard input, which is the
correct behavior.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2024-04-17 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_write(&c, stdout, CREDENTIAL_OP_RESPONSE);
|
2012-06-24 11:39:59 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(op, "approve")) {
|
credential: gate new fields on capability
We support the new credential and authtype fields, but we lack a way to
indicate to a credential helper that we'd like them to be used. Without
some sort of indication, the credential helper doesn't know if it should
try to provide us a username and password, or a pre-encoded credential.
For example, the helper might prefer a more restricted Bearer token if
pre-encoded credentials are possible, but might have to fall back to
more general username and password if not.
Let's provide a simple way to indicate whether Git (or, for that matter,
the helper) is capable of understanding the authtype and credential
fields. We send this capability when we generate a request, and the
other side may reply to indicate to us that it does, too.
For now, don't enable sending capabilities for the HTTP code. In a
future commit, we'll introduce appropriate handling for that code,
which requires more in-depth work.
The logic for determining whether a capability is supported may seem
complex, but it is not. At each stage, we emit the capability to the
following stage if all preceding stages have declared it. Thus, if the
caller to git credential fill didn't declare it, then we won't send it
to the helper, and if fill's caller did send but the helper doesn't
understand it, then we won't send it on in the response. If we're an
internal user, then we know about all capabilities and will request
them.
For "git credential approve" and "git credential reject", we set the
helper capability before calling the helper, since we assume that the
input we're getting from the external program comes from a previous call
to "git credential fill", and thus we'll invoke send a capability to the
helper if and only if we got one from the standard input, which is the
correct behavior.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2024-04-17 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_set_all_capabilities(&c, CREDENTIAL_OP_HELPER);
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_approve(&c);
|
2012-06-24 11:39:59 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(op, "reject")) {
|
credential: gate new fields on capability
We support the new credential and authtype fields, but we lack a way to
indicate to a credential helper that we'd like them to be used. Without
some sort of indication, the credential helper doesn't know if it should
try to provide us a username and password, or a pre-encoded credential.
For example, the helper might prefer a more restricted Bearer token if
pre-encoded credentials are possible, but might have to fall back to
more general username and password if not.
Let's provide a simple way to indicate whether Git (or, for that matter,
the helper) is capable of understanding the authtype and credential
fields. We send this capability when we generate a request, and the
other side may reply to indicate to us that it does, too.
For now, don't enable sending capabilities for the HTTP code. In a
future commit, we'll introduce appropriate handling for that code,
which requires more in-depth work.
The logic for determining whether a capability is supported may seem
complex, but it is not. At each stage, we emit the capability to the
following stage if all preceding stages have declared it. Thus, if the
caller to git credential fill didn't declare it, then we won't send it
to the helper, and if fill's caller did send but the helper doesn't
understand it, then we won't send it on in the response. If we're an
internal user, then we know about all capabilities and will request
them.
For "git credential approve" and "git credential reject", we set the
helper capability before calling the helper, since we assume that the
input we're getting from the external program comes from a previous call
to "git credential fill", and thus we'll invoke send a capability to the
helper if and only if we got one from the standard input, which is the
correct behavior.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2024-04-17 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_set_all_capabilities(&c, CREDENTIAL_OP_HELPER);
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
credential_reject(&c);
|
2012-06-24 11:39:59 +00:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
usage(usage_msg);
|
2012-06-24 11:39:59 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2024-05-27 11:46:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
credential_clear(&c);
|
2011-12-10 10:31:11 +00:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
