Repository navigation
log(dm): close sensitive diagnostic redaction gaps #12897
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
Open
joechenrh
wants to merge
4
commits into
pingcap:master
Choose a base branch
from
joechenrh:fix/dm-request-log-redaction
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+1,070
−121
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
edee992
security(dm): redact credentials in configuration diagnostics
joechenrh d3fb736
log(dm): add worker diagnostic redaction helpers
joechenrh bc2e115
log(dm): redact normal-level SQL and DDL diagnostics
joechenrh e2f9ae9
worker(dm): redact diagnostic copies of status and error responses
joechenrh File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🔒 Security & Privacy | 🛡️ Detected with Advanced Tier | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win
Sensitive Data Exposure
Reachability: External
Exploitability: Moderate
CWE: CWE-532 — Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File
View Security blast radius
Redact credentials inside storage URIs.
A valid task can put
secret_access_keyin the S3 URI atloaders.global.dir. Thedirkey does not matchisSensitiveConfigField, soredactConfigFieldsleaves the URI intact. The request marshaler then writes that credential to the log. Redact credential-bearing URI parameters without removing the diagnostic path. Add a request-log test with a credentialeddir. (docs.pingcap.com)🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a valid remaining exposure. DM-owned dump-path logging was explicitly excluded from this PR's agreed scope, so the request's
diris still unchanged. The TiDB bump fixes the embedded Dumpling/Lightning paths, not this DM request field; the PR description calls out that boundary. I'm leaving this finding open rather than treating it as covered.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@joechenrh Thanks for clarifying the scope. The finding remains valid and open. The TiDB bump does not cover credential exposure through the DM request’s
dirfield.Would you like me to open a follow-up GitHub issue for DM-owned dump-path redaction?
✏️ Learnings added
You are interacting with an AI system.