Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
47 lines (40 loc) · 5.02 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

47 lines (40 loc) · 5.02 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for avaloniaui/avalonia

Attack Surface: 1. XAML Parsing Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Exploitation of flaws in Avalonia's XAML parsing engine to inject malicious code or data.
  • Avalonia Contribution: Avalonia's core UI definition relies on XAML, making its parser a central and direct point of vulnerability. This is entirely within Avalonia's domain.
  • Example: An attacker provides a crafted XAML file (e.g., via a "load theme" feature) containing an XXE payload that attempts to read system files or connect to an external server. Another example is using x:Code to execute arbitrary C# code.
  • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE), Information Disclosure, Denial of Service (DoS).
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Disable DTD processing and external entity resolution in the XAML parser configuration. This is crucial and directly related to Avalonia's parser.
      • Validate and sanitize any XAML loaded from untrusted sources (user input, network, external files). Treat all external XAML as potentially hostile.
      • Avoid loading XAML dynamically from user input if at all possible. If unavoidable, use a whitelist of allowed elements and attributes.
      • Restrict or heavily scrutinize the use of x:Code. Consider sandboxing or isolating any code executed from XAML. This is a direct Avalonia feature.
      • Regularly update Avalonia to the latest version to benefit from security patches specifically addressing XAML parsing.

Attack Surface: 2. Data Binding Injection

  • Description: Injection of malicious data through Avalonia's data binding mechanism, leading to unexpected behavior or code execution.
  • Avalonia Contribution: Avalonia's data binding system is the direct mechanism by which this attack is facilitated. While the vulnerability is triggered by user input, the pathway is entirely within Avalonia.
  • Example: A user enters <Button Command="{Binding MaliciousCommand}" /> into a text field that is bound to a ContentControl.Content property. If MaliciousCommand is a property on a user-controlled object, it could execute arbitrary code. This leverages Avalonia's binding system directly.
  • Impact: Code Execution (potentially), UI Manipulation, Denial of Service.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Always validate and sanitize user input before it is used in data binding. This is crucial, though not unique to Avalonia.
      • Use value converters to encode or escape data appropriately for the target UI element. This utilizes Avalonia's converter mechanism.
      • Avoid binding directly to user-provided strings, especially for properties that control behavior (e.g., Command, Style). This is specific to how Avalonia handles binding.
      • Prefer strongly-typed bindings and view models to reduce the risk of unexpected data types. This leverages Avalonia's type system.
      • Use a "Model-View-ViewModel" (MVVM) pattern – a pattern strongly encouraged by Avalonia's design.

Attack Surface: 3. Custom Control Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Bugs in custom Avalonia controls or renderers that can be exploited to cause crashes, DoS, or potentially code execution.
  • Avalonia Contribution: Avalonia directly provides the API and framework for creating custom controls, making it responsible for the potential attack surface introduced by these controls.
  • Example: A custom control that renders images might have a buffer overflow vulnerability when handling a malformed image file. A custom text editor control might have vulnerabilities related to text parsing or rendering. These vulnerabilities would reside within the custom control's implementation, built using Avalonia's APIs.
  • Impact: Denial of Service, Code Execution (potentially), Memory Corruption.
  • Risk Severity: High (potentially Critical if RCE is possible)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developer:
      • Thoroughly review and test all custom control code (built using Avalonia's APIs), paying close attention to input validation, error handling, and resource management.
      • Use fuzz testing to identify potential vulnerabilities in custom controls, especially those that handle complex input, leveraging Avalonia's rendering and input handling.
      • Follow secure coding practices, such as avoiding buffer overflows and using safe memory management techniques, within the context of Avalonia's framework.
      • Consider using a memory-safe language (like Rust) for performance-critical or security-sensitive custom controls that interact deeply with Avalonia's internals.
      • Isolate custom controls in separate assemblies – a good practice facilitated by Avalonia's architecture.