3

I have embedded Lua in a C++ application. I need to be able to kill rogue (i.e. badly written scripts) from hogging resources.

I know I will not be able to cater for EVERY type of condition that causes a script to run indefinitely, so for now, I am only looking at the straightforward Lua side (i.e. scripting side problems).

I also know that this question has been asked (in various guises) here on SO. Probably the reason why it is constantly being re-asked is that as yet, no one has provided a few lines of code to show how the timeout (for the simple cases like the one I described above), may actually be implemented in working code - rather than talking in generalities, about how it may be implemented.

If anyone has actually implemented this type of functionality in a C++ with embedded Lua application, I (as well as many other people - I'm sure), will be very grateful for a little snippet that shows:

  • How a timeout can be set (in the C++ side) before running a Lua script
  • How to raise the timeout event/error (C++ /Lua?)
  • How to handle the error event/exception (C++ side)

Such a snippet (even pseudocode) would be VERY, VERY useful indeed

oompahloompah
  • 9,087
  • 19
  • 62
  • 90

3 Answers3

8

You need to address this with a combination of techniques. First, you need to establish a suitable sandbox for the untrusted scripts, with an environment that provides only those global variables and functions that are safe and needed. Second, you need to provide for limitations on memory and CPU usage. Third, you need to explicitly refuse to load pre-compiled bytecode from untrusted sources.

The first point is straightforward to address. There is a fair amount of discussion of sandboxing Lua available at the Lua users wiki, on the mailing list, and here at SO. You are almost certainly already doing this part if you are aware that some scripts are more trusted than others.

The second point is question you are asking. I'll come back to that in a moment.

The third point has been discussed at the mailing list, but may not have been made very clearly in other media. It has turned out that there are a number of vulnerabilities in the Lua core that are difficult or impossible to address, but which depend on "incorrect" bytecode to exercise. That is, they cannot be exercised from Lua source code, only from pre-compiled and carefully patched byte code. It is straightforward to write a loader that refuses to load any binary bytecode at all.

With those points out of the way, that leaves the question of a denial of service attack either through CPU consumption, memory consumption, or both. First, the bad news. There are no perfect techniques to prevent this. That said, one of the most reliable approaches is to push the Lua interpreter into a separate process and use your platform's security and quota features to limit the capabilities of that process. In the worst case, the run-away process can be killed, with no harm done to the main application. That technique is used by recent versions of Firefox to contain the side-effects of bugs in plugins, so it isn't necessarily as crazy an idea as it sounds.

One interesting complete example is the Lua Live Demo. This is a web page where you can enter Lua sample code, execute it on the server, and see the results. Since the scripts can be entered anonymously from anywhere, they are clearly untrusted. This web application appears to be as secure as can be asked for. Its source kit is available for download from one of the authors of Lua.

RBerteig
  • 41,948
  • 7
  • 88
  • 128
2

Snippet is not a proper use of terminology for what an implementation of this functionality would entail, and that is why you have not seen one. You could use debug hooks to provide callbacks during execution of Lua code. However, interrupting that process after a timeout is non-trivial and dependent upon your specific architecture.

You could consider using a longjmp to a jump buffer set just prior to the lua_call or lua_pcall after catching a time out in a luaHook. Then close that Lua context and handle the exception. The timeout could be implemented numerous ways and you likely already have something in mind that is used elsewhere in your project.

The best way to accomplish this task is to run the interpreter in a separate process. Then use the provided operating system facilities to control the child process. Please refer to RBerteig's excellent answer for more information on that approach.

Community
  • 1
  • 1
Judge Maygarden
  • 26,961
  • 9
  • 82
  • 99
1

A very naive and simple, but all-lua, method of doing it, is

-- Limit may be in the millions range depending on your needs
setfenv(code,sandbox)
pcall (function() debug.sethook(
  function() error ("Timeout!") end,"", limit)
  code() 
  debug.sethook() 
  end);

I expect you can achieve the same through the C API.

However, there's a good number of problems with this method. Set the limit too low, and it can't do its job. Too high, and it's not really effective. (Can the chunk get run repeatedly?) Allow the code to call a function that blocks for a significant amount of time, and the above is meaningless. Allow it to do any kind of pcall, and it can trap the error on its own. And whatever other problems I haven't thought of yet. Here I'm also plain ignoring the warnings against using the debug library for anything (besides debugging).

Thus, if you want it reliable, you should probably go with RB's solution.

I expect it will work quite well against accidental infinite loops, the kind that beginning lua programmers are so fond of :P

For memory overuse, you could do the same with a function checking for increases in collectgarbage("count") at far smaller intervals; you'd have to merge them to get both.

MaHuJa
  • 3,148
  • 1
  • 18
  • 6