Skip to content

feat: added detection for LaTeX injection #4206

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 14, 2025

Conversation

Xhoenix
Copy link
Member

@Xhoenix Xhoenix commented Jul 14, 2025

Reference: Link

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 14, 2025

📊 Quantitative test results for language: eng, year: 2023, size: 10K, paranoia level: 1:
🚀 Quantitative testing did not detect new false positives

@Xhoenix Xhoenix added the release:new-detection In this PR we introduce a new detection label Jul 14, 2025
@Xhoenix Xhoenix requested a review from a team July 14, 2025 07:00
Copy link
Member

@fzipi fzipi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Nice addition!

@Xhoenix Xhoenix added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 14, 2025
Merged via the queue into coreruleset:main with commit 55bbf2e Jul 14, 2025
7 checks passed
@Xhoenix Xhoenix deleted the detect-latex-injection branch July 14, 2025 12:43
@azurit
Copy link
Member

azurit commented Jul 14, 2025

Your regex is too wide, it is matching, for example:

\anything-here-unlimited-lenght{
\anything-here-unlimited-lenght=
\anything-here-unlimited-lenght|

I suggest to match only specitifc latex commands, which we consider dangerous, for example \openin\file=.

@azurit
Copy link
Member

azurit commented Jul 14, 2025

Should not be merged yet.

@Xhoenix Xhoenix restored the detect-latex-injection branch July 14, 2025 12:55
@Xhoenix Xhoenix deleted the detect-latex-injection branch July 14, 2025 13:08
@Xhoenix
Copy link
Member Author

Xhoenix commented Jul 14, 2025

Already merged, revert not possible without creating another PR. Will create another PR with suggested changes.

@azurit
Copy link
Member

azurit commented Jul 14, 2025

Thanks.

@fzipi fzipi mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2025
@S0obi
Copy link
Contributor

S0obi commented Jul 31, 2025

@Xhoenix @azurit seems like this rule sneaked in release v4.17.0 without the proposed change. I am actually worried about the potential false positives it may create. Should we act on it ? Thanks in advance

@theseion
Copy link
Contributor

theseion commented Aug 1, 2025

Thanks @S0obi. @Xhoenix could you open that PR? We can create a patch release.

@theseion
Copy link
Contributor

theseion commented Aug 1, 2025

FYI @fzipi.

@fzipi
Copy link
Member

fzipi commented Aug 1, 2025

Ugh.

@azurit
Copy link
Member

azurit commented Aug 2, 2025

@Xhoenix You promised to send a PR, do you have time for it or should we handle it?

@Xhoenix
Copy link
Member Author

Xhoenix commented Aug 2, 2025

I wanted to implement the changes, but decided not due to the discussion in #4210. Let's get that sorted out.

@azurit
Copy link
Member

azurit commented Aug 2, 2025

It MUST be changed somehow, no matter what, we cannot match strings like \................whole web page containing anything with any lenght................= on PL1.

@Xhoenix
Copy link
Member Author

Xhoenix commented Aug 2, 2025

I'll try to modify #4210.

@Xhoenix
Copy link
Member Author

Xhoenix commented Aug 4, 2025

@azurit I've suggested some changes in #4210 , either you can implement those, or close that PR and come up with your own changes, otherwise we'll have to revert this PR, until a fix is provided, since we can't accept a clear FP at PL 1 in production.

@fzipi
Copy link
Member

fzipi commented Aug 4, 2025

For what is worth, we are reverting this one then until someone comes with a fix.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release:new-detection In this PR we introduce a new detection
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants