Validate against infinite loop in ListItemNode.setIndent #4120
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
acywatson
requested review from
zurfyx,
fantactuka,
tylerjbainbridge and
thegreatercurve
as code owners
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
size-limit report 📦
|
Closed
thegreatercurve
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2023
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This one is a bit interesting. We had a couple of issues here.
First, we shouldn't have been using ListItemNode.setIndent in the deserialization logic for this node, as it runs a bunch of node manipulation logic that shouldn't be necessary in that code path.
Second, if you call ListItemNode.setIndent directly and you're not using a compile-time type-checker, then you can cause an infinite loop here. It's a bit of a footgun lying around.
On the other hand, you could probably cause all sorts of weird issues by passing invalid data types into node setters across the library. I'm addressing this because it seems like particularly gnarly one, but taking this to it's logic conclusion means we'd do this everywhere, which I'm not sure is practically necessary.
Fixes #4119