Problem:
Callbacks sometimes need access to memory. Memory is instance specific.
Hence callbacks need to be able to securely identify the instance they are called from.
Proposed solution:
Would like C-API extended as follows to add a void* parameter to callbacks.
wasm_trap_t* my_callback(const wasm_val_t args[], wasm_val_t results[], void *user)
... which is assigned using (proposed) WASM_API_EXTERN void wasmtime_instance_userdata(const wasm_instance_t*, void *user);
Then I can cast my void pointer to that instance's wasm_memory_t pointer or a more complex struct depending on needs of the embedder.
Hi Steve. The WebAssembly C API has wasm_func_new_with_env
which accepts a void*
for such purposes.
Actually, I think I misread your suggestion.
As that data is attached to the host function, not the instance. Wasmtime has extensions to the C-API to get the "caller", which can be used to access the memory.
wasmtime_func_new
and wasmtime_func_new_with_env
use callbacks with a "caller", which you can call wasmtime_caller_export_get
to get an export of.
Thanks, Peter. Looked that up, it'll do for starters, but wasmtime_caller_export_get performs a string look up against potentially a huge export list, every call. So it'll work but its not performant. With respect, I prefer my approach.
& you're right, wasm_func_new_with_env isn't instance specific, so it's almost useful, but not quite :)
If the wasmtime method can be morphed as suggested, anything that currently needs to perform an export lookup inside the callback can do so, by passing the export struct as its parameter, so my suggestion is backwards compatible with anything using current approach.
Please consider morphing as suggested as performance is an important consideration.
This then needs pushing into the wasm-c-api spec as quickly as possible for the same reason there is such a thing. A consistent effective API. Without a reliable, secure, performant means of identifying the calling instance in callbacks, the API is ineffective beyond trivial examples (single instance invocations).
minor: the project needs rebranding if you want it to reach its full potential. there's nothing "web" about this assembly format/system. web is primary use case & driver for secure assembly, but its not the only one.
blender 3d art package would do well to move from python to secure assembly for example.
so I'd call it that, secure assembly.
my 2c.
As this is going to get lost in a wall of text, have filed it : https://github.com/WebAssembly/wasm-c-api/issues/140
Think my workaround is to use wasm_func_new_with_env with one instance per store for the time being.
That might even be enough. Dunno, we'll see :)
sigh. this is trivial. I'll just do it at some point. its not a security issue as Andreas states. We're trusted side.
https://github.com/WebAssembly/wasm-c-api/issues/140
Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC