Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
58 lines (49 loc) · 5.81 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

58 lines (49 loc) · 5.81 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for vurtun/nuklear

Attack Surface: Input Validation Failures (Text Input)

  • Description: Insufficient validation of user-supplied text data passed to Nuklear's text input functions (e.g., nk_edit_string).
  • Nuklear Contribution: Nuklear provides the text input widgets and basic filtering, but relies entirely on the application for proper length validation and sanitization to prevent buffer overflows and format string vulnerabilities. It offers no inherent protection against these.
  • Example: An attacker enters a string containing format string specifiers (e.g., %x%x%x%x) into a Nuklear text field. The application doesn't sanitize the input before passing it to Nuklear, and a subsequent nk_draw_text call uses this string, leading to information disclosure.
  • Impact: Buffer overflows, format string vulnerabilities, potential arbitrary code execution.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Implement strict length checks before calling Nuklear input functions. Use strncpy or safer alternatives.
      • Sanitize input to remove or escape potentially dangerous characters, especially format string specifiers.
      • Fuzz test input fields with various inputs, including long strings and special characters.
      • Use static analysis tools (e.g., Coverity, Fortify) to detect potential buffer overflows and format string vulnerabilities.

Attack Surface: Unsafe Custom Input Handling

  • Description: Vulnerabilities introduced when the application uses Nuklear's raw input API (nk_input_begin, nk_input_end, etc.) and implements its own input processing logic.
  • Nuklear Contribution: Nuklear provides the low-level input API, giving the application complete control and full responsibility for input safety. Any flaws in the application's custom handling are directly exposed.
  • Example: The application uses nk_input_key to handle keyboard input. A bug in the application's logic allows an attacker to inject arbitrary key events, bypassing authentication checks or triggering unintended actions (e.g., simulating "admin" key presses).
  • Impact: Bypass of security controls, input spoofing, potentially arbitrary code execution (depending on the vulnerability and how the input is used).
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Avoid using the raw input API unless absolutely necessary. Prefer Nuklear's higher-level widgets.
      • If raw input handling is required, implement extremely thorough input validation, bounds checking, and sanitization.
      • Use a secure input handling library if possible.
      • Extensively fuzz test and perform static analysis on any custom input handling code.

Attack Surface: Malicious Font Files (Indirect, via Font Rendering Library)

  • Description: Exploitation of vulnerabilities in the external font rendering library (e.g., stb_truetype) that Nuklear uses, triggered by a maliciously crafted font file.
  • Nuklear Contribution: Nuklear indirectly exposes this attack surface by relying on an external font rendering library. Nuklear itself doesn't handle font parsing, but it uses the results.
  • Example: The application allows users to load custom fonts. An attacker provides a crafted font file that exploits a buffer overflow in stb_truetype, leading to code execution when Nuklear attempts to render text using that font.
  • Impact: Potential arbitrary code execution.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Use a well-vetted, up-to-date, and actively maintained font rendering library.
      • Validate font files before loading them. This might involve checking file signatures, using a font validator tool, or sandboxing the font loading process.
      • Strongly consider restricting the ability for users to load arbitrary custom fonts. Provide a curated set of safe fonts instead.

Attack Surface: Vulnerabilities in Custom Widgets and Drawing (When Interacting with Nuklear)

  • Description: Security flaws in the application's custom-built GUI components and drawing routines that interact with Nuklear's context.
  • Nuklear Contribution: Nuklear provides the framework and drawing context, but the application developer is entirely responsible for the security of any custom code that interacts with it. This is the most likely source of high-severity vulnerabilities.
  • Example: A custom widget for displaying images, integrated with Nuklear, contains a buffer overflow vulnerability when handling malformed image data passed to it through Nuklear's drawing commands.
  • Impact: Varies widely, but can include crashes, denial of service, and potentially arbitrary code execution if the vulnerability is exploitable.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Thoroughly review and test all custom widget and drawing code that interacts with Nuklear's context.
      • Follow secure coding practices rigorously (input validation, bounds checking, safe memory management).
      • Use static analysis tools and fuzzing to identify vulnerabilities.
      • Strongly consider using a memory-safe language (e.g., Rust) for implementing custom GUI components that interact with Nuklear.
      • Keep any third-party libraries used by custom widgets up-to-date.