Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
45 lines (30 loc) · 6.13 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

45 lines (30 loc) · 6.13 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for migueldeicaza/gui.cs

Attack Surface: Terminal Escape Sequence Injection

  • Description: Applications using gui.cs to display user-controlled text in the terminal are vulnerable to terminal escape sequence injection. gui.cs's rendering might not inherently sanitize or effectively prevent the interpretation of escape sequences embedded in user input.

  • gui.cs Contribution: gui.cs is the direct rendering engine for text in the terminal UI. Its text rendering functions are the pathway for malicious escape sequences to be interpreted by the terminal. Lack of built-in sanitization within gui.cs for displayed text directly contributes to this vulnerability.

  • Example: An application uses a gui.cs Label to display user-provided feedback. If an attacker inputs the string "\x1b[38;2;255;0;0mCritical Alert!\x1b[0m", gui.cs will render this directly. The terminal will interpret \x1b[38;2;255;0;0m as a command to set the text color to red, and \x1b[0m to reset formatting. This could be used for UI spoofing to display fake critical alerts or warnings, potentially leading users to take unintended actions. In more severe scenarios, depending on the terminal and context, more damaging escape sequences could be injected.

  • Impact:

    • UI Spoofing (High): Misleading users with fake prompts, warnings, or information by manipulating the terminal display.
    • Denial of Service (High): Injecting sequences that disrupt terminal functionality, clear the screen repeatedly, alter terminal settings in a way that hinders usability, or potentially cause terminal instability.
    • Potential for Social Engineering (High): Spoofed UI elements can be used to trick users into providing sensitive information or performing actions they wouldn't otherwise.

  • Risk Severity: High

  • Mitigation Strategies:

    • Developer Mitigation:
      • Mandatory Input Sanitization: Developers must implement strict sanitization of all user-provided input before displaying it using gui.cs elements. This should involve removing or escaping terminal escape sequences. Use a well-vetted sanitization library or create a robust custom function.
      • Context-Aware Output (If Possible): Explore if gui.cs offers any safer text rendering modes or functions that inherently avoid interpreting escape sequences. Consult gui.cs documentation for such options.
      • Principle of Least Privilege in Display: Avoid displaying raw, unsanitized user input directly in critical UI elements like warnings or prompts. If possible, use pre-defined, safe messages for such elements.

Attack Surface: Logic Errors in UI Components (Widgets) - Potential for Critical Impact in Specific Scenarios

  • Description: Logic errors or vulnerabilities within the implementation of gui.cs's core UI widgets (like Button, TextBox, ListView, critical dialog widgets, etc.) could be exploited. While general widget bugs might be medium severity, flaws in critical widgets or those handling sensitive data or actions could have high or even critical impact.

  • gui.cs Contribution: gui.cs directly provides and implements these UI widgets. Any logic errors, state management issues, or input handling flaws within these widgets are directly attributable to gui.cs.

  • Example: Imagine a critical dialog widget in gui.cs used for confirming security-sensitive actions (e.g., deleting data, changing permissions). If this dialog widget has a logic flaw – for example, a state management issue that could cause the "Cancel" button to be ignored under certain conditions, or a vulnerability that allows bypassing confirmation – this could lead to unintended and potentially harmful actions being executed. Another example could be a ListView widget used to display file paths; a vulnerability in how it handles or renders paths could be exploited to cause issues if path handling is security-sensitive in the application.

  • Impact:

    • Application Logic Bypass (High to Critical): Exploiting widget flaws to circumvent intended application workflows, security checks, or access controls.
    • Data Integrity Issues (High): Widget bugs leading to incorrect data display, manipulation, or processing, potentially corrupting application data or leading to incorrect decisions based on flawed UI information.
    • Unintended Actions (Critical): In critical UI components (like confirmation dialogs), logic errors could lead to users unintentionally performing harmful actions (data deletion, privilege escalation, etc.).

  • Risk Severity: Potentially Critical (Severity depends heavily on the specific widget, the nature of the logic error, and how the widget is used in the application. Flaws in widgets handling sensitive operations or data are higher risk).

  • Mitigation Strategies:

    • Developer Mitigation:
      • Rigorous Widget Testing: Implement comprehensive testing specifically for gui.cs widgets used in security-sensitive parts of the application. Focus on edge cases, unusual input, and state transitions.
      • Focused Code Review of Critical Widgets: Prioritize code review of the source code for gui.cs widgets that are used for critical functions or handle sensitive data. Look for potential logic errors, state management issues, and input validation flaws.
      • Input Validation and Output Encoding within Application Logic: Even if widgets are assumed to be secure, implement robust input validation and output encoding in the application logic that uses the widgets, especially for security-sensitive operations. Don't solely rely on widget-level security.
      • Principle of Least Privilege in UI Design: Design UIs to minimize the impact of potential widget flaws. For example, avoid overly complex interactions in critical dialogs, and clearly separate critical actions from less important ones in the UI.