-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.6k
gh-137335: Fix unlikely name conflicts for named pipes in multiprocessing and asyncio on Windows #137389
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
serhiy-storchaka
wants to merge
3
commits into
python:main
Choose a base branch
from
serhiy-storchaka:temp-named-pipes
base: main
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and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
gh-137335: Fix unlikely name conflicts for named pipes in multiprocessing and asyncio on Windows #137389
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions
2
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2025-08-04-23-20-43.gh-issue-137335.IIjDJN.rst
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | ||
Get rid of any possibility of a name conflict for named pipes in | ||
:mod:`multiprocessing` and :mod:`asyncio` on Windows, no matter how small. |
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.
A comment:
we could use
os.urandom(8).hex()
but this would only reduce the number of loop iterations we would do until we find a suitable name. OTOH, this makes normal cases much slower (usually, we are not in the presence of an adversary that is trying to create pipes...), so we would be only doing the loop once.Now, I'm actually worried that it if we're able to interact with the process that is creating the pipes, then we could actually recover enough samples from the underlying PRNG instance and get the original seed. But this is only if 1) there are no random calls in between and 2) we can get 624 consecutive 32-bit samples from the random source.
Condition 2) already holds because random.randbytes(8) is actually equivalent to two calls of
random.randbytes(4)
that are concatenated. Since reverting MT-19937 requires only consecutive 624 32-bit words, this is the same as doing 312 pipe creations where we don't have calls torandom.*
in between (and then inspect the named file). This could be possible in practice, especially if we're talking about the multiprocessing and the asyncio components which could have some interactivness (e.g., a server).Therefore, I would still suggest using
os.urandom(8).hex()
even if it slows down the calls.