Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
193 lines (136 loc) · 20.7 KB

sec-design.md

File metadata and controls

193 lines (136 loc) · 20.7 KB

Project Design Document: Humanizer Library

Project Name: Humanizer

Project Repository: https://github.com/humanizr/humanizer

Document Version: 1.1 Date: 2023-10-27 Author: AI Expert

1. Introduction

This document provides a refined design overview of the Humanizer library, a .NET library focused on enhancing the readability of application outputs by converting data into human-friendly formats. This document is intended to serve as a comprehensive resource for threat modeling, security analysis, and understanding the architectural nuances of systems integrating the Humanizer library.

1.1. Purpose of Humanizer

Humanizer's core purpose is to bridge the gap between machine-oriented data representation and human comprehension. It achieves this by offering a fluent and intuitive API to transform various data types—strings, enums, dates, times, timespans, numbers, and quantities—into more natural and easily understandable forms. This improves user experience and reduces cognitive load when interacting with applications.

1.2. Target Audience

This document is designed for a diverse audience involved in the software development lifecycle, including:

  • Software Architects and Designers: To understand the library's architecture and integration points within larger systems.
  • Security Engineers and Threat Modelers: To identify potential security considerations and conduct thorough threat assessments.
  • Developers using the Humanizer library: To gain a deeper understanding of the library's functionality and best practices for secure usage.
  • Quality Assurance and Testing Teams: To develop effective test cases, including security-focused tests.
  • Anyone interested in the internal design and potential security implications of using Humanizer in .NET applications.

2. System Architecture

Humanizer is architected as a lightweight and modular library, emphasizing ease of integration and minimal performance overhead. It operates as a set of .NET extensions and classes, seamlessly augmenting the capabilities of standard .NET types without requiring significant architectural changes in the host application.

2.1. Deployment Model

Humanizer is distributed and consumed as a NuGet package. Developers incorporate it into their .NET projects by simply adding the NuGet package dependency through standard package management tools. Upon project build, the Humanizer library code is compiled and linked directly into the application's assembly, becoming an integral part of the deployed application.

flowchart LR
    subgraph "Application Environment"
        "A[\"Application Code\"]" --> "B[\"Humanizer Library\"]";
        "B" --> "C[\".NET Runtime (.NET Framework/.NET Core/.NET)\"]";
        "C" --> "D[\"Operating System\"]";
    end
Loading

Diagram Description:

  • "Application Code": Represents the custom .NET application code that leverages the Humanizer library's functionalities.
  • "Humanizer Library": The Humanizer NuGet package, integrated as a dependency within the application.
  • ".NET Runtime (.NET Framework/.NET Core/.NET)": The underlying .NET runtime environment responsible for executing the application and the Humanizer library. This could be .NET Framework, .NET Core, or the latest .NET.
  • "Operating System": The host operating system (e.g., Windows, Linux, macOS) providing the execution environment for the .NET runtime.

2.2. Key Components (Modular Structure)

Humanizer's modular design allows for focused functionality and reduces the footprint of the library when only specific features are needed. Key components are organized around the data types and humanization tasks they address:

  • Number Humanization Module:

    • Ordinalization: Converts integers to ordinal words (e.g., 1 becomes "1st", 2 becomes "2nd").
    • Number to Words: Transforms numbers into their textual representation (e.g., 123 becomes "one hundred and twenty-three").
    • Metric Suffix Formatting: Applies metric suffixes for large numbers (e.g., 1500 becomes "1.5K", 1000000 becomes "1M").
    • Precision Control: Offers options to control decimal precision and rounding behavior during number humanization.

  • Date and Time Humanization Module:

    • Relative Time Formatting: Converts DateTime and TimeSpan values into human-readable relative time phrases (e.g., "5 minutes ago", "in 2 hours", "yesterday").
    • Time Unit Granularity: Allows customization of the precision and granularity of relative time outputs (e.g., showing only minutes or including seconds).
    • Locale-Aware Formatting: Leverages localization settings to format dates and times according to cultural conventions.

  • String Humanization Module:

    • Casing Conversion: Transforms PascalCase, CamelCase, and snake_case strings into human-readable phrases (e.g., "ProductName" to "Product name", "userID" to "User ID").
    • Title and Sentence Casing: Provides functions for applying title case and sentence case formatting to strings.
    • String Truncation and Word Wrapping: Offers utilities for truncating strings to a specified length or wrapping text at word boundaries.

  • Collection Humanization Module:

    • Collection to String Conversion: Formats lists and arrays into grammatically correct comma-separated strings, including "and" before the last item (e.g., ["apple", "banana", "orange"] becomes "apple, banana and orange").

  • Pluralization and Singularization Module:

    • Grammatical Pluralization: Converts words between singular and plural forms based on English (and other localized) grammar rules.
    • Irregular Plural Handling: Includes logic to handle irregular plural forms (e.g., "child" to "children", "mouse" to "mice").

  • Metric Units and Quantities Module:

    • Unit Formatting: Formats numbers with appropriate metric units and prefixes (e.g., "1000 meters" becomes "1 kilometer").
    • Basic Unit Conversion: Provides limited support for unit conversions within related metric units.

  • Localization and Culture Support Module:

    • Multi-Language Support: Offers localization for various languages and cultures through resource files.
    • Culture-Specific Formatting: Adapts formatting rules for numbers, dates, times, and pluralization based on the specified culture.
    • Extensibility: Allows for extending localization support with custom resource files for specific application needs.

3. Data Flow

The data flow within Humanizer is designed to be efficient and localized to the specific humanization task being performed. Input data is processed through the relevant module, potentially utilizing localization resources, and a humanized string is returned.

flowchart LR
    "A[\"Input Data (Number, Date, String, etc.)\"]" --> "B[\"Humanizer API Method Call (e.g., `.Humanize()`, `.ToQuantity()`, `.ToWords()`) \"]";
    "B" --> "C[\"Dispatch to Relevant Humanization Logic Module (Based on Data Type and Method)\"]";
    "C" --> "D[\"Localization Resources (Culture-Specific Rules, Translations) - Optional\"]";
    "D" --> "E[\"Humanized Output String\"]";
Loading

Diagram Description:

  • "Input Data (Number, Date, String, etc.)": The raw data that the application intends to humanize.
  • "Humanizer API Method Call (e.g., .Humanize(), .ToQuantity(), .ToWords()) ": The application invokes a specific Humanizer extension method or API function, passing the input data.
  • "Dispatch to Relevant Humanization Logic Module (Based on Data Type and Method)": Humanizer internally routes the request to the appropriate module based on the data type and the chosen humanization method (e.g., Number Humanization for numbers, Date and Time Humanization for dates).
  • "Localization Resources (Culture-Specific Rules, Translations) - Optional": Depending on the requested operation and the configured culture, the module may access localization resources to apply culture-specific formatting rules, translations, and pluralization logic. This step is optional if no localization is required or if default culture settings are used.
  • "Humanized Output String": The final human-readable string generated by the Humanizer library, ready to be used by the application.

4. Technology Stack

  • Programming Language: C#
  • Target Frameworks: .NET Standard 2.0, .NET Framework 4.5+, .NET Core, .NET (Cross-platform compatibility).
  • Dependencies: Minimal external dependencies. Primarily relies on core .NET libraries, ensuring a lightweight footprint. (Refer to the project's *.csproj files for a definitive list of dependencies for in-depth analysis).
  • Build System: Standard .NET build tools (MSBuild, .NET CLI) are used for building and packaging the library.
  • Testing Framework: NUnit is employed for unit testing, ensuring the quality and correctness of the library's functionalities.
  • Package Management: NuGet for distribution and consumption as a .NET library package.

5. Security Considerations (For Threat Modeling)

While Humanizer is primarily a data formatting library and not directly involved in sensitive data processing or network communication, security considerations are still relevant when integrating it into applications. These considerations are crucial for a comprehensive threat model.

5.1. Input Validation and Data Handling

  • Locale Injection Vulnerability (Low Risk, but Consider): Humanizer is locale-aware, and its behavior can change based on the configured culture. If an application dynamically sets the locale based on unvalidated user input (e.g., from HTTP headers like Accept-Language), a malicious user could potentially attempt to influence the output by injecting unexpected or crafted locale values. While unlikely to lead to direct code execution in Humanizer itself, it could cause unexpected application behavior or, in very specific scenarios, indirect information disclosure if the application logic improperly handles localized outputs. Mitigation: Always validate and sanitize locale inputs if they are derived from external sources. Ideally, configure locale settings server-side or use a predefined set of supported locales.

  • Indirect Format String Vulnerabilities: Humanizer's output strings are generally safe. However, if these humanized strings are subsequently used in contexts vulnerable to format string attacks (e.g., legacy logging functions that directly interpret format specifiers in log messages, or insecure string formatting methods), an indirect vulnerability could arise. For example, if a humanized string like "User input: {0}" (where {0} is intended to be a placeholder) is passed to a vulnerable logging function, and a malicious user can control parts of the input that gets humanized, they might be able to inject format string specifiers. Mitigation: Always use parameterized logging and secure string formatting practices throughout the application, regardless of whether the strings originate from Humanizer or other sources. Avoid using string concatenation or vulnerable string formatting methods when dealing with potentially untrusted data, including humanized strings.

  • Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) - (Theoretical, Low Probability): Some Humanizer operations, particularly string manipulation and pluralization, might internally utilize regular expressions. While the library is designed for efficiency, and ReDoS vulnerabilities are generally less likely in well-tested libraries, it's a theoretical consideration. If extremely long or maliciously crafted input strings were processed by regex-heavy components, it could potentially lead to excessive CPU consumption and a Denial of Service (DoS). This is a low probability risk in Humanizer due to its nature and likely internal optimizations, but it's a general security principle to be aware of when using libraries that process string inputs. Mitigation: While unlikely to be necessary for Humanizer specifically, in general, for string processing libraries, consider input length limits, use well-vetted regex patterns, and potentially employ regex analysis tools to detect potentially problematic patterns.

5.2. Dependency Security

  • NuGet Package Integrity and Supply Chain Security: It is crucial to obtain the Humanizer NuGet package from the official and trusted NuGet Gallery (nuget.org). This minimizes the risk of supply chain attacks where malicious actors could distribute compromised packages. Mitigation: Always verify the NuGet package source and consider using package signing verification if available and supported by your tooling. Regularly audit project dependencies.

  • Dependency Vulnerability Scanning: Although Humanizer has minimal dependencies, it's still a best practice to periodically scan your application's dependencies, including Humanizer (and its transitive dependencies, if any), for known security vulnerabilities. Tools like OWASP Dependency-Check, Snyk, or GitHub Dependency Scanning can automate this process. Mitigation: Integrate dependency scanning into your CI/CD pipeline and development workflow to proactively identify and address any reported vulnerabilities in Humanizer or its dependencies.

5.3. Localization Resource Security (If Custom Resources are Used)

  • Tampering of Custom Localization Files: If applications extend Humanizer with custom localization resource files (e.g., for supporting new languages or overriding default translations), these files become part of the application's deployment. If these resource files are stored in insecure locations or are not properly protected from unauthorized modification, they could be tampered with. Maliciously modified localization resources could lead to incorrect or misleading output, potentially impacting application functionality or user perception. Mitigation: Store custom localization resources in secure locations, apply appropriate file system permissions, and consider integrity checks (e.g., checksums) to detect unauthorized modifications. If possible, embed localization resources within the application assembly to reduce the risk of external tampering.

5.4. General Code Quality and Library Maintenance

  • Importance of Code Review and Static Analysis: While Humanizer is a popular and actively maintained open-source project, for applications with stringent security requirements, it's beneficial to conduct code reviews and static analysis on the Humanizer library code (or at least the specific modules being used). This can help identify potential subtle coding errors, unexpected behaviors, or areas for improvement that might have security implications, even if not directly exploitable vulnerabilities. Mitigation: Incorporate code review and static analysis practices into your development process. Consider using static analysis tools to scan your codebase, including the Humanizer library (if feasible and relevant to your security posture).

6. Threat Modeling Considerations

When performing threat modeling for applications that utilize Humanizer, consider the following steps and questions to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities:

  • 1. Identify Entry Points and Data Sources:

    • Entry Points: Pinpoint all locations in your application code where Humanizer API methods are called. These are the entry points for potential interactions with the library. Examples:
      • myNumber.ToWords() for displaying numbers in words in a UI.
      • myDate.Humanize() for showing relative times in notifications.
      • myString.PascalizeToHumanTitle() for formatting labels in a report.
    • Data Sources: Trace the origin of the data being passed to Humanizer API calls. Is it:
      • Hardcoded values? (Low risk)
      • Data from a database? (Medium risk - depends on database security)
      • User input directly? (Higher risk - requires careful validation)
      • Data from external APIs? (Medium to High risk - depends on API security and data validation)

  • 2. Map Data Flow and Output Usage:

    • Trace the flow of humanized output strings. How are these strings used within the application?
      • Displayed directly to users in the UI? (Consider UI injection risks if output is not properly encoded)
      • Used in logging systems? (Consider indirect format string vulnerabilities)
      • Included in API responses? (Consider data sensitivity and potential for information disclosure)
      • Used for further processing or calculations within the application? (Less likely to be a direct security risk from Humanizer itself, but consider the logic that processes the output).

  • 3. Define Security Objectives:

    • Confidentiality: Is sensitive information being humanized and potentially exposed in a less controlled format? (Less likely to be a direct concern with Humanizer itself, but consider the data being processed).
    • Integrity: Is it critical that the humanized output is accurate and not misleading? (Tampering with localization resources could impact integrity).
    • Availability: Could malicious input or resource exhaustion related to Humanizer impact the application's availability? (ReDoS is a theoretical DoS risk).

  • 4. Identify Potential Threats (Based on Security Considerations in Section 5):

    Threat Category Specific Threat Humanizer Component/Feature Affected Potential Impact
    Input Validation Locale Injection Localization, Culture Settings Unexpected application behavior, potential indirect information disclosure (unlikely)
    Indirect Vulnerabilities Indirect Format String Vulnerability Output Strings used in logging/formatting Potential code execution (if vulnerable logging/formatting is used elsewhere)
    DoS Regular Expression DoS (ReDoS) String Humanization, Pluralization Potential Denial of Service (low probability)
    Supply Chain Compromised NuGet Package NuGet Package Distribution Code execution, data breach, supply chain compromise
    Dependency Vulnerabilities Vulnerabilities in Humanizer's Dependencies (if any) Dependencies Depends on the vulnerability; potential code execution, DoS, etc.
    Resource Security Tampering with Custom Localization Resources Localization Resources Incorrect/misleading output, potential application malfunction

  • 5. Develop Mitigation Strategies: For each identified threat, define specific mitigation strategies. Examples:

    • Locale Injection: Validate and sanitize locale inputs, use server-side configuration for locale settings.
    • Indirect Format String Vulnerability: Use parameterized logging and secure string formatting practices.
    • ReDoS: (Unlikely to require specific mitigation for Humanizer, but general practice: input length limits, regex review).
    • Compromised NuGet Package: Use official NuGet Gallery, verify package signatures (if possible), regularly audit dependencies.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities: Implement dependency scanning and vulnerability management processes.
    • Tampering with Custom Localization Resources: Secure storage, file system permissions, integrity checks, consider embedding resources.

7. Conclusion

Humanizer is a valuable asset for enhancing the usability of .NET applications by making data more human-centric. By understanding its architecture, data flow, and potential security considerations outlined in this document, developers and security teams can effectively integrate Humanizer while mitigating potential risks. This refined design document provides a solid foundation for conducting comprehensive threat modeling, implementing appropriate security measures, and ensuring the secure and reliable operation of applications leveraging the Humanizer library. Continuous monitoring for dependency vulnerabilities and adherence to secure coding practices are essential for maintaining the security posture of applications using Humanizer.