Skip to content

test: assume priv ports start at 1024 if it can't be changed #46536

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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
nodejs-github-bot merged 3 commits into from
Mar 2, 2023
Merged

test: assume priv ports start at 1024 if it can't be changed #46536

Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
526eed0
test: assume priv ports start at 1024 if it can't be changed
Feb 7, 2023
a5017cf
Update to remove TOCTOU stat-then-open pattern
Feb 7, 2023
1f161a1
Previous update reverted old v18 method, now based on new v19
Feb 8, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 9 additions & 3 deletions test/parallel/test-cluster-bind-privileged-port.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -27,9 +27,15 @@ const net = require('net');
const { readFileSync } = require('fs');

if (common.isLinux) {
const unprivilegedPortStart = parseInt(readFileSync('/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_unprivileged_port_start'));
if (unprivilegedPortStart <= 42) {
common.skip('Port 42 is unprivileged');
try {
const sysctlOutput = execSync('sysctl net.ipv4.ip_unprivileged_port_start').toString();
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@lpinca lpinca Feb 8, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This basically reverts f69e84c. Can't you simply handle the error thrown by readFileSync('/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_unprivileged_port_start') when the file does not exist?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@KrayzeeKev KrayzeeKev Feb 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, that is so embarrassing. I am doing this in v19 and v18 (the one I'm actually trying to deploy). Went back to the old one. Ignore this. Will fix in next few hours. ARGGHHH

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@KrayzeeKev KrayzeeKev Feb 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK, fixed. Needed more coffee. Working in 3 places (v19 source, v18 source, my build).

const unprivilegedPortStart = parseInt(sysctlOutput.split(' ')[2], 10);
if (unprivilegedPortStart <= 42) {
common.skip('Port 42 is unprivileged');
}
} catch {
// Do nothing, feature doesn't exist, minimum is 1024 so 42 is usable.
// Continue...
}
}

Expand Down