Perl - Regular expression yielding strange results - regex

I am running a Perl script that runs a Linux system command, namely service --status-all in order to list services which have stopped and services which are currently running. The code that I am using runs the system command, and then chomps the input into an array. Followed by this the code is supposed to check if the service that the user promts for is running or has stopped, this is done using a regex that does yield the correct result. The problem lies in the additional information that the program lists, namely lines such as dnsdomainname: Unknown host and sometimes prints several lines of the same result.
The code that I am running is as follows:
use warnings;
use strict;
#Looping variables
my $service_query = 1;
#Command
my $command_3 = "service --status-all";
#Input variables
my $service = 0;
while ($service_query == 1){
print "Please choose the service that you wish to analyze (Named service):\n";
$service = <>;
if ($service =~ /^[a-zA-Z0-9.:_-]+$/)
{
$service_query = 0;
}
else
{
print "Argument not allowed.\n";
}
}
chomp(my #service_data_1 = qx/$command_3/);
chomp($service);
foreach my $line4(#service_data_1) #Filter output according to "$service".
{
if ($line4 =~ /$service\s\Spid\s[0-9]+\S\s(\S+)/)
{
print "1 $service is running\n";
}
elsif ($line4 =~ /$service\sis\s(\S+)/)
{
print "0 $service has stopped\n";
}
}
The system command yields results such as these:
sandbox is stopped
rpc.svcgssd is stopped
rpcbind (pid 1284) is running...
saslauthd is stopped
openssh-daemon (pid 1593) is running...
wpa_supplicant (pid 1444) is running...
What I want to be listed:
User inputs sandbox, program should print: 0 sandbox has stopped
What I actually get:
User inputs sandbox, program prints:
dnsdomainname: Unknown host
0 sandbox has stopped
I appreciate any help on the matter, thank you.

Most likely the service command clears the environment and does other things to ensure consistent results from what are essentially shell scripts n your service.d directory. In fact service itself may be a shell script (it usually was when I used Linux long ago). You can inspect it to help figure out why you are seeing dnsdomainname: Unknown host (it may be due to an environment variable like $HOSTNAME being cleared, or a missing name in /etc/hosts that normally wouldn't be an issue for the service command, for example).
Following on #choroba's query the output you see on your console when you run service --status-all in your shell might not be the same output you get from qx/ / in your perl script because of the way service itselfs handles STDOUT and STDERR.
From perdoc -f qx (cf. #TLP's remarks):
To read both a command's STDOUT and its STDERR separately, it's
easiest to redirect them separately to files, and then read from
those files when the program is done.
Another approach, if you are willing to use a CPAN module, is Capture::Tiny which is a great tool for grabbing what you want from perl code or external commands.

Related

Permissions issue calling bash script from c++ code that apache is running

The goal of this code is to create a stack trace whenever a sigterm/sigint/sigsegv/etc is caught. In order to not rely on memory management inside of the C++ code in the case of a sigsegv, I have decided to write a bash script that will receive the PID and memory addresses in the trace array.
The Sig events are being caught.
Below is where I generate the call to the bash script
trace_size = backtrace(trace, 16);
trace[1] = (void *)ctx->rsi;
messages = backtrace_symbols(trace, trace_size);
char syscom[356] = {0};
sprintf(syscom,"bash_crash_supp.sh %d", getpid());
for (i=1; i<(trace_size-1) && i < 10; ++i)
{
sprintf(syscom,"%s %p",syscom,trace[i]);
}
Below is where my issue arises. The command in syscom is generating correctly. I can stop the code before the following popen, run the command in a terminal, and it functions correctly.
However running the script directly from the c++ code does not seem to work.
setuid(0);
FILE *bashCommand = popen(syscom,"r");
char buf[256] = {0};
while(fgets(buf,sizeof(buf),bashCommand) != 0) {
LogMessage(LOG_WARNING, "%s\n", buf);
}
pclose(bashCommand);
exit(sig);
The purpose of the bash script is to get the offset from /proc/pid/maps, and then use that to run addr2line to get the file name/line number.
strResult=$(sudo cat /proc/"$1"/maps | grep "target_file" | grep -m 1 '[0-9a-fA-F]')
offset=$( cut -d '-' -f 1 <<< "$strResult");
However offset is getting 0 when I run from the c++ code, but when I run the exact same command (that is stored in syscom in the c++ code) in a terminal, I get the expected output.
I have been trying to fix this for a while. Permissions are most likely the issue, but I've tried to work around these with every way I know of/have seen via google. The user trying to run the script (currently running the c++ code) is apache.
The fix does not need to worry about the security of the box. If something as simple as "chmod 777 /proc -r" worked, that would have been the solution (sadly the OS doesn't let me mess do such commands with /proc).
Things I've already tried:
Adding `` around the command that's stored in syscom from the c++ code
chown the script to apache
chmod 4755 on the bash_crash_supp.sh script, allowing it to always fire as root.
I have added apache to sudoers (visudo), allowing them to run sudo without using a password
I have added a sub file to sudoers.d (just in case) that does the same as above
I have looked into objdump, however it does not give me either the offset or the file/line num for an addr (from what I can see)
I have setuid(0) in the c++ code to set the current user to root
Command generated in C++
bash_crash_supp.sh 25817 0x7f4bfe600ec8 0x7f4bf28f7400 0x7f4bf28f83c6 0x7f4bf2904f02 0x7f4bfdf0fbb0 0x7f4bfdf1346e 0x7f4bfdf1eb30 0x7f4bfdf1b9a8 0x7f4bfdf176b8
Params in bash:
25817 0x7f4bfe600ec8 0x7f4bf28f7400 0x7f4bf28f83c6 0x7f4bf2904f02 0x7f4bfdf0fbb0 0x7f4bfdf1346e 0x7f4bfdf1eb30 0x7f4bfdf1b9a8 0x7f4bfdf176b8
Can anyone think of any other ways to solve this?
Long story short, almost all Unix-based systems ignore setuid on any interpreted script (anything with a shebang #!) as a security precaution.
You may use setuid on actual executables, but not the shell scripts themselves. If you're willing to take a massive security risk, you can make a wrapper executable to run the shell script and give the executable setuid.
For more information, see this question on the Unix StackExchange: https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/2910

pidof from a background script for another background process

I wrote a c++ program to check if a process is running or not . this process is independently launched at background . my program works fine when I run it on foreground but when I time schedule it, it do not work .
int PID= ReadCommanOutput("pidof /root/test/testProg1"); /// also tested with pidof -m
I made a script in /etc/cron.d/myscript to time schedule it as follows :-
45 15 * * * root /root/ProgramMonitor/./testBkg > /root/ProgramMonitor/OutPut.txt
what could be the reason for this ?
string ReadCommanOutput(string command)
{
string output="";
int its=system((command+" > /root/ProgramMonitor/macinfo.txt").c_str());
if(its==0)
{
ifstream reader1("/root/ProgramMonitor/macinfo.txt",fstream::in);
if(!reader1.fail())
{
while(!reader1.eof())
{
string line;
getline(reader1,line);
if(reader1.fail())// for last read
break;
if(!line.empty())
{
stringstream ss(line.c_str());
ss>>output;
cout<<command<<" output = ["<<output<<"]"<<endl;
break;
}
}
reader1.close();
remove("/root/ProgramMonitor/macinfo.txt");
}
else
cout<<"/root/ProgramMonitor/macinfo.txt not found !"<<endl;
}
else
cout<<"ERROR: code = "<<its<<endl;
return output;
}
its output coming as "ERROR: code = 256"
thanks in advacee .
If you really wanted to pipe(2), fork(2), execve(2) then read the output of a pidof command, you should at least use popen(3) since ReadCommandOutput is not in the Posix API; at the very least
pid_t thepid = 0;
FILE* fpidof = popen("pidof /root/test/testProg1");
if (fpidof) {
int p=0;
if (fscanf(fpidof, "%d", &p)>0 && p>0)
thepid = (pid_t)p;
pclose(fpidof);
}
BTW, you did not specify what should happen if several processes (or none) are running the testProg1....; you also need to check the result of pclose
But you don't need to; actually you'll want to build, perhaps using snprintf, the pidof command (and you should be scared of code injection into that command, so quote arguments appropriately). You could simply find your command by accessing the proc(5) file system: you would opendir(3) on "/proc/", then loop on readdir(3) and for every entry which has a numerical name like 1234 (starts with a digit) readlink(2) its exe entry like e.g. /proc/1234/exe ...). Don't forget the closedir and test every syscall.
Please read Advanced Linux Programming
Notice that libraries like Poco or toolkits like Qt (which has a layer QCore without any GUI, and providing QProcess ....) could be useful to you.
As to why your pidof is failing, we can't guess (perhaps a permission issue, or perhaps there is no more any process like you want). Try to run it as root in another terminal at least. Test its exit code, and display both its stdout & stderr at least for debugging purposes.
Also, a better way (assuming that testProg1 is some kind of a server application, to be run in at most one single process) might be to define different conventions. Your testProg1 might start by writing its own pid into /var/run/testProg1.pid and your current application might then read the pid from that file and check, with kill(2) and a 0 signal number, that the process is still existing.
BTW, you could also improve your crontab(5) entry. You could make it run some shell script which uses logger(1) and (for debugging) runs pidof with its output redirected elsewhere. You might also read the mail perhaps sent to root by cron.
Finally I solved this problem by using su command
I have used
ReadCommanOutput("su -c 'pidof /root/test/testProg1' - root");
insteadof
ReadCommanOutput("pidof /root/test/testProg1");

Windows Command Line Processor: Multiple and Nested IF Statements

Intended software: windows command line processor (version 6.1.7601.17514)
Hi,
I've been trying to build a multiple-statement command line that runs within a short-cut. My goal is to be able to click one short-cut that checks if my hosted network is started or not, and then takes appropriate action based on the check. The code that starts and stops the hosted network is fine, and for the most part, the logic works, but I notice odd behavior when I check the outputs of the logic. I suspect that my problem has to do with the way I structured the statements, but I'm having difficulty properly interpreting the built-in documentation and the documentation I can find in the MSDN library. If it's possible, I want to avoid using batch files for this solution.
To keep things simple, I've substituted my lengthy "netsh" commands with "echo" commands that show the errorcode. The code below is what I'm using to test my logic:
Test Code
netsh wlan show hostednetwork | find "Not" && echo found %errorlevel% || echo lost %errorlevel%
Currently, the way I'm reading this is:
Show me hostednetwork's status and send the output to input
Attempt to find the string "Not" in the input
If the attempt succeeds, output "found" and the errorcode to the screen
If the attempt fails, then output "lost" and the errorcode to the screen
Notice that I'm not using any flags on the find command. I'm doing this because I want to reduce the chance of finding a false match. To clarify what I mean, I'll show the output if I just put in
netsh wlan show hostednetwork:
Sample Output of Hostednetwork Status
C:\Windows\system32>netsh wlan show hostednetwork
Hosted network settings
-----------------------
Mode : Allowed
SSID name : "TestHost"
Max number of clients : 100
Authentication : WPA2-Personal
Cipher : CCMP
Hosted network status
---------------------
Status : Not started
If I search for the string "Not", then that's sufficient to tell me that the hosteadnetwork is not started, because when the hosteadnetwork is started, the output shows "Started".
The way I'm simulating the conditions of the hostednetwork is with the following commands:
netsh wlan start hostednetwork
netsh wlan stop hostednetwork
I expect that when I open a command prompt (as an administrator):
If the hostednetwork is not started, I should see a "found 0" in the output, meaning that the string was found and that there were no errors.
If the hostednetwork is started, I should see a "lost 1" in the output, meaning that the string was not found and that there was an error.
Case #1 works, but case #2 doesn't work on the first try. Here's my output when the hostednetwork is already started:
Output With Hostednetwork Started
C:\Windows\system32>netsh wlan start hostednetwork
The hosted network started.
C:\Windows\system32>netsh wlan show hostednetwork | find "Not" && echo found %er
rorlevel% || echo lost %errorlevel%
lost 0
C:\Windows\system32>netsh wlan show hostednetwork | find "Not" && echo found %er
rorlevel% || echo lost %errorlevel%
lost 1
Other Attempted Solutions
The way I've written the test code is the best I could come up with so far. In previous attempts, I've tried:
Setting a custom variable instead of using the errorlevel variable, but I get the same output on case #2.
Changing the code into an if else equivalent, but that didn't pan out very well.
Wrapping the conditional statements in brackets "()" after the pipe and using different combinations of the special symbols "&" and "|".
Other Questions
This question is related to another that I've been trying to figure out. If I wanted to search for three different strings in a command's output and exit on a different error code for each string, how can I do this? The syntax below is my starting point:
myCommand [/options] | ((find "string1" && exit /b 2 || ver>nul) &&
(find "string2" && exit /b 3 || ver>nul) && (find "string3" && exit /b 4 || ver>nul))
For the same reasons above, I didn't use any flags on the "find" commands. Also, I used "ver>nul" in an attempt to keep the syntax correct since I know the "ver" operation succeeds.
Any assistance is appreciated.
I don't understand why you want to avoid use of a batch script. Your shortcut can simply point to a small batch script, and life will be much easier.
But it is possible to do what you want. The value of %errolevel% is determined during parsing, and the entire shortcut is parsed in one pass, so you get the value that existed prior to execution of your FIND commands. You need delayed expansion !errorlevel! to get your desired results.
In batch you use setlocal enableDelayedExpansion, but that does not work from the command line (or a shortcut). Instead you must instantiate an extra CMD.EXE with the /V:ON option.
netsh wlan show hostednetwork | cmd /v:on /c "find "Not" && echo found !errorlevel! || echo lost !errorlevel!"
There are multiple levels of quoting going on, and that can sometimes cause problems. You can eliminate the quotes enclosing the command if you escape the special characters.
netsh wlan show hostednetwork | cmd /v:on /c find "Not" ^&^& echo found !errorlevel! ^|^| echo lost !errorlevel!
Regarding your 2nd question, I see 2 problems.
1) I don't understand the point of having a shortcut designed to exit with different error codes. How can you possibly make use of the returned error code?
2) You cannot pipe content into multiple FIND commands. The first FIND command will consume all the content and close the pipe, and then subsequent FIND commands will wait indefinitely for content from the keyboard.
You would have to redirect your command output to a temp file, and then redirect input of each FIND command to the temp file.
You cannot evaluate a variable in the same line. It needs delayed expansion and !errorlevel! to be used.
Do it in a batch file and you won't have a problem using delayed expansion.

Program output is different when executed through Powershell remote session

I'm developing a Windows Console Application, using Visual Studio 2010, which prints progress percentage on screen such that the last number gets overwritten with the current number. I'm using carriage return to achieve this like so:
std::wcout
<< "[Running: "
<< std::setw(3)
<< std::setprecision(3)
<< percent
<< "%]"
<< '\r'
;
When I execute this program through PowerShell on a remote host using PSSesion:
Enter-PSSession WWW.XXX.YYY.ZZZ -credential <UserName>
[WWW.XXX.YYY.ZZZ]: PS C:\> .\test.exe
it behaves differently compared to when its executed locally either in PowerShell or in cmd.exe. I face following three problems:
1) The console output of the program is different, in that, instead of overwriting [Running xx%] its printing in the next line like so:
[Running 1%]
[Running 2%]
[Running 3%]
[Running 4%]
...
This is similar to what happens when output of a program is redirected to a file (lone carriage returns or newlines are replaced with carriage returns+newlines combinations).
2) The output doesn't shows up as and when the program writes something to cout. It comes at once at the end of execution. Does powershell caches the output of remote program and sends to the caller only once? If there is significant time difference between two lines (line meaning all the output between two newlines) then the first line gets printed as if it waits for some time for another newline and if received, it again goes to waiting state, if not received within certain time period (~500ms), it sends the output till last newline (and not all the accumulated output) to the caller. As can be seen from my code, there is no newline resulting in all the [Running xx%] being printed at once at the end.
3) At certain point in the program I need user's confirmation, but cin.fail() returns true in remote execution. So, is there any way to take user input in such an execution environment? Or is there any way to detect that the program is being executed remotely through Powershell (eg. some env variable)?
Any help related to any point will be greatly appreciated. :)
With respect to 1), the WinRM protocol for PowerShell Remoting is really just an input/output stream for commands and their serialized output. It has no terminal emulation capabilities, so when you run things remotely, their output is fed back sequentially one line at a time. If you used SSH or Telnet to a remote shell of powershell.exe, you would likely see what you expect.
As for 2), the default output buffermode appears to be "Block" so this would explain the behaviour you're seeing. You can change this with the New-PSSessionOption cmdlet to create a configuration for a session created by New-PSSession that can be passed to the -Session parameter on remoting aware cmdlets. The option is OutputBufferingMode. If you set it to None, you should get the desired behaviour.
# default output buffering mode is "none" for default options
$s = new-pssession localhost -sessionoption (new-pssessionoption)
enter-pssession $s
For 3), you should be able to accept input interactively IIRC. Looks like interactive stuff doesn't work right - I may have completely misremembered this.

How to unit test a command line interface

I've written a command line tool that I want to test (I'm not looking to run unit tests from command line). I want to map a specific set of input options to a specific output. I haven't been able to find any existing tools for this. The application is just a binary and could be written in any language but it accepts POSIX options and writes to standard output.
Something along the lines of:
For each known set of input options:
Launch application with specified input.
Pipe output to a file.
Diff output to stored (desired) output.
If diff is not empty, record error.
(Btw, is this what you call an integration test rather than a unit test?)
Edit: I know how I would go about writing my own tool for this, I don't need help with the code. What I want to learn is if this has already been done.
DejaGnu is a mature and somewhat standard framework for writing test suites for CLI programs.
Here is a sample test taken from this tutorial:
# send a string to the running program being tested:
send "echo Hello world!\n"
# inspect the output and determine whether the test passes or fails:
expect {
-re "Hello world.*$prompt $" {
pass "Echo test"
}
-re "$prompt $" {
fail "Echo test"
}
timeout {
fail "(timeout) Echo test"
}
}
Using a well-established framework like this is probably going to be better in the long run than anything you can come up with yourself, unless your needs are very simple.
You are looking for BATS (Bash Automated Testing System):
https://github.com/bats-core/bats-core
From the docs:
example.bats contains
#!/usr/bin/env bats
#test "addition using bc" {
result="$(echo 2+2 | bc)"
[ "$result" -eq 4 ]
}
#test "addition using dc" {
result="$(echo 2 2+p | dc)"
[ "$result" -eq 4 ]
}
$ bats example.bats
✓ addition using bc
✓ addition using dc
2 tests, 0 failures
bats-core
Well, I think every language should have a way of execute an external process.
In C#, you could do something like:
var p = new Process();
p.StartInfo = new ProcessStartInfo(#"C:\file-to-execute.exe");
... //You can set parameters here, etc.
p.StartInfo.RedirectStandardOutput = true;
p.StartInfo.RedirectStandardInput = true;
p.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false;
p.Start();
//To read the standard output:
var output = p.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd();
I have never had to write to the standard input, but I believe it can be done by accessing to p.StandardInput as well. The idea is to treat both inputs as Stream objects, because that's what they are.
In Python there is the subprocess module. According to its documentation:
The subprocess module allows you to spawn new processes, connect to their input/output/error pipes, and obtain their return codes.
I had to do the same when writing unit tests for the code generation part of a compiler I write some months ago: Writing unit tests in my compiler (which generates IL)
We wrote should, a single-file Python program to test any CLI tool. The default usage is to check that a line of the output contains some pattern. From the docs:
# A .should file launches any command it encounters.
echo "hello, world"
# Lines containing a `:` are test lines.
# The `test expression` is what is found at the right of the `:`.
# Here 'world' should be found on stdout, at least in one line.
:world
# What is at the left of the `:` are modifiers.
# One can specify the exact number of lines where the test expression has to appear.
# 'moon' should not be found on stdout.
0:moon
Should can check occurrences counts, look for regular expressions, use variables, filter tests, parse json data, and check exit codes.
Sure, it's been done literally thousands of times. But writing a tool to run simple shell scripts or batch files like what you propose is a trivial task, hardly worth trying to turn into a generic tool.