Use safeloader to load checkpoint meta files - #3067
Open
pplantinga wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
While loading checkpoints is known to be unsafe (see issue #1930), a related potential security issue is loading checkpoint meta files (usually
CKPT.yaml) which is currently also unsafe, and has the potential to be slightly more surprising as all meta files in the save directory can be loaded for sorting etc., not just the target checkpoint. This adjusts the behavior so that meta files are loaded with SafeLoader, reducing the chance that a malicious meta file could be loaded without knowing.Adopting this PR would mean that the old supported behavior of storing objects (e.g. Tensors) in the meta would be no longer supported, so we should run recipe tests and make sure no recipes depend on this. Also, this would merit a warning in the release notes and potentially a minor version marker rather than patch (i.e. 1.2 rather than 1.1.1).