Add further validation to keys #46
Merged
Conversation
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 will hopefully prevent any attempt to specify zoneinfo files outside of TZPATH.
ZoneInfo constructors may raise ValueError if the input is an invalid key (e.g. if it is invalid for security reasons) and ZoneInfoNotFoundError if it is a theoretically acceptable key that does not exist on the file system.
179c73a to
6f25ce2
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 will hopefully prevent any attempt to specify zoneinfo files outside of TZPATH.
This also makes the distinction between
ZoneInfoNotFoundError, which is for missing keys and a plainValueError, which is used for a key that we reject as invalid.Right now I am not enforcing that the key be considered valid when passed to
ZoneInfo.from_file(..., key=key)because thatkeyis not used to look up any files (it's just the name for the zone), but maybe we should?Fixes #44.
Maybe @tiran - would you be willing to take a look at this, since it is one of the only "security" things in PEP 615?