Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
19 lines (11 loc) · 2.9 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

19 lines (11 loc) · 2.9 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for humanizr/humanizer

Attack Surface: Key Attack Surface List (Humanizer-Specific, High/Critical Only, Direct Involvement)

  • There are no elements that meet all criteria.

Attack Surface: Explanation and Justification for Empty List

After careful consideration and applying the strict criteria (direct involvement of Humanizer, High/Critical severity), there are no attack vectors that meet all conditions. Here's why:

  • Resource Exhaustion (Originally Medium): While extremely large inputs could cause resource exhaustion, this is mitigated by input validation before Humanizer is called. The resource exhaustion is not a direct result of a flaw within Humanizer, but rather a failure to properly validate input before using it. Therefore, it doesn't meet the "direct involvement" criterion. Furthermore, it's not typically considered "High" or "Critical" severity unless the application is exceptionally poorly designed to handle large inputs in general.
  • Code Injection (Originally Low/Extremely Low): The scenarios involving Pascalize(), Camelize(), etc., leading to code injection are extremely unlikely and require gross negligence in how the application handles user input and code generation. These are not direct vulnerabilities in Humanizer; they are vulnerabilities in the application's (mis)use of the library's output. They are not "High" or "Critical" because they rely on fundamentally flawed application design.
  • XSS (Originally Low): The locale-based XSS scenario is also extremely low probability and relies on a combination of factors, including user-controlled locales and a lack of output encoding. This is not a direct vulnerability in Humanizer.
  • Information Disclosure (Originally Medium): The Truncate() misuse scenario is an application logic flaw, not a direct vulnerability in Humanizer. It's also not "High" or "Critical" unless the leaked information is exceptionally sensitive and the application has no other protections.

Attack Surface: Important Conclusion

The absence of items in this highly filtered list does not mean Humanizer is perfectly secure in all situations. It means that, when used reasonably (with basic input validation and output sanitization), the direct attack surface introduced by Humanizer itself is minimal and unlikely to lead to high or critical severity vulnerabilities. The primary risks associated with Humanizer stem from misusing its output in security-sensitive contexts, which are application-level vulnerabilities, not Humanizer-specific vulnerabilities. The previous, more comprehensive lists are still valuable for understanding the broader context of potential risks.