Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
78 lines (59 loc) · 9.12 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

78 lines (59 loc) · 9.12 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for glfw/glfw

Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Update GLFW

  • Description:

    1. Monitor GLFW Releases: Subscribe to GLFW's mailing list, watch the GitHub repository (https://github.com/glfw/glfw) releases page, or use a dependency management tool that alerts you to new GLFW versions.
    2. Review Release Notes: When a new version is released, carefully review the release notes and changelog. Pay close attention to security-related fixes, bug fixes, and any changes that might impact your application's GLFW usage.
    3. Test in a Staging Environment: Before updating GLFW in your production environment, update it in a staging or testing environment. Run tests relevant to GLFW functionality in your application to ensure compatibility and identify any regressions introduced by the update.
    4. Update Dependencies: Update your project's dependency management configuration (e.g., CMakeLists.txt, project files) to point to the new GLFW version.
    5. Rebuild and Redeploy: Rebuild your application with the updated GLFW library and deploy the updated application.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Exploitation of Known GLFW Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Outdated GLFW libraries are susceptible to publicly known vulnerabilities. Regular updates patch these, reducing the attack surface specifically related to GLFW.
    • GLFW Related Instability and Bugs Leading to DoS (Medium Severity): Bugs in older GLFW versions can lead to crashes or unexpected behavior exploitable for DoS. Updates often include bug fixes improving GLFW's stability.

  • Impact:

    • Exploitation of Known GLFW Vulnerabilities: Significantly reduces risk by eliminating known GLFW vulnerabilities.
    • GLFW Related Instability and Bugs Leading to DoS: Partially reduces risk by addressing known GLFW bugs that could be exploited for DoS.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially Implemented: Dependency updates are often part of development, but proactive, security-focused GLFW updates might be missing. Version control tracks dependency changes. CI/CD might rebuild on dependency updates, but explicit GLFW security update schedules might be absent.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Proactive GLFW Release Monitoring: Lack of automated systems to specifically monitor GLFW releases and alert developers.
    • Scheduled GLFW Updates: No defined schedule for regularly checking and updating GLFW, especially for security patches.
    • Formalized GLFW Testing Post-Update: Testing after GLFW updates might be ad-hoc, lacking a formalized process with GLFW-specific checks.

Mitigation Strategy: Verify GLFW Download Source

  • Description:

    1. Use Official GLFW Website/Repository: Always download GLFW source code or pre-compiled binaries from the official GLFW website (https://www.glfw.org/) or the official GitHub repository (https://github.com/glfw/glfw).
    2. Verify HTTPS for GLFW Sources: Ensure you are accessing the official website and GitHub repository over HTTPS to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks when downloading GLFW.
    3. Check GLFW Digital Signatures/Hashes (If Available): If GLFW provides digital signatures or checksums (like SHA256 hashes) for releases, verify downloaded GLFW files against these to ensure integrity and authenticity of the GLFW library.
    4. Avoid Third-Party GLFW Mirrors (Unless Trusted): Be cautious with third-party mirrors or package repositories for GLFW. Only use mirrors officially endorsed by GLFW or from highly reputable and trusted sources.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • GLFW Supply Chain Attacks (High Severity): Downloading GLFW from untrusted sources risks obtaining a compromised GLFW version with malware or backdoors, directly impacting GLFW functionality and potentially the entire application.
    • Man-in-the-Middle Attacks on GLFW Downloads (Medium Severity): Downloading GLFW over insecure HTTP could allow attackers to intercept and replace legitimate GLFW files with malicious ones during transit.

  • Impact:

    • GLFW Supply Chain Attacks: Significantly reduces risk by ensuring GLFW comes from a trusted source, making it harder to inject malicious code into the GLFW library itself.
    • Man-in-the-Middle Attacks on GLFW Downloads: Significantly reduces risk by using HTTPS and verifying file integrity, making it very difficult to tamper with GLFW downloads in transit.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially Implemented: Developers generally know to download from official sources. HTTPS is common for website access. However, explicit verification of GLFW signatures/hashes might be less consistently applied.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Automated GLFW Hash Verification: Build systems or dependency management tools could automatically verify checksums of downloaded GLFW libraries.
    • Developer Training on GLFW Source Verification: Formal training or guidelines for developers on secure GLFW acquisition and verification practices.
    • Policy Enforcement for GLFW Sources: Organizational policies mandating official sources and verification methods specifically for GLFW and other external libraries.

Mitigation Strategy: Use Official GLFW Build Instructions and Consider Linking Type

  • Description:

    1. Follow Official GLFW Build Guide: Adhere to the official GLFW build instructions provided on the GLFW website or in the GLFW documentation for your target platform and compiler. Deviating from these instructions might introduce vulnerabilities or weaken GLFW's intended security configuration.
    2. Understand Static vs. Dynamic GLFW Linking: Consider the security implications of static vs. dynamic linking of GLFW into your application.
      • Static Linking: GLFW code is compiled directly into your application executable. Updates require rebuilding and redeploying the entire application. Potentially larger executable size.
      • Dynamic Linking: Your application relies on a separate GLFW library file (e.g., a .dll, .so, or .dylib) at runtime. System-level GLFW updates can benefit your application without application rebuild, but introduces a runtime dependency.
    3. Choose Linking Based on Update Strategy: Select static or dynamic linking based on your application's update and patching strategy, considering the trade-offs between ease of GLFW updates and runtime dependencies. For security-critical applications, dynamic linking might be preferred if system-level library updates are reliably managed.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Vulnerabilities from Improper GLFW Build Configuration (Medium Severity): Incorrect build configurations or deviations from official instructions could unintentionally disable security features or introduce weaknesses in the compiled GLFW library.
    • Delayed GLFW Patching (Static Linking - High Severity): With static linking, if a GLFW vulnerability is discovered, patching requires rebuilding and redeploying the application, potentially leading to a longer window of vulnerability exposure compared to dynamic linking where a system-level GLFW update might suffice.
    • Dependency Confusion/Compromise (Dynamic Linking - Medium Severity): With dynamic linking, if the system's GLFW library is compromised or replaced by a malicious version, all applications using it become vulnerable.

  • Impact:

    • Vulnerabilities from Improper GLFW Build Configuration: Partially reduces risk by ensuring GLFW is built as intended by its developers, minimizing unintended security weaknesses.
    • Delayed GLFW Patching (Static Linking): Partially reduces risk (with dynamic linking) by potentially allowing faster patching through system-level updates, but static linking might be necessary for other reasons (e.g., portability).
    • Dependency Confusion/Compromise (Dynamic Linking): Partially increases risk (with dynamic linking) if system library management is weak, but system-level updates can also be a security advantage if well-managed.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially Implemented: Developers generally follow build instructions to get GLFW working. Consideration of static vs. dynamic linking is often driven by deployment and dependency management needs, less frequently by security patching concerns.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Security-Focused Build Configuration Guides: More explicit guidance on security considerations within GLFW build instructions, highlighting secure configuration options if available.
    • Automated Build Verification: Automated checks in build processes to verify that GLFW is built according to official recommendations and with expected security settings.
    • Documentation on GLFW Linking Security Trade-offs: Clearer documentation explaining the security trade-offs between static and dynamic linking of GLFW to inform developer decisions.