Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
116 lines (87 loc) · 8.09 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

116 lines (87 loc) · 8.09 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for clap-rs/clap

Mitigation Strategy: Limit Argument Length (using clap)

Mitigation Strategy: Limit Argument Length (using clap)

Description:

  1. Identify String Arguments: Within your clap argument definitions, identify all arguments that accept string values.
  2. Determine Maximum Lengths: For each string argument, determine a reasonable maximum length based on its intended use.
  3. Apply value_parser!(String).range(...): Use clap's value_parser! macro with the .range(...) modifier to enforce the length limit directly within the parsing process. Example: 
    .arg(Arg::new("username")
    .long("username")
    .value_parser(value_parser!(String).range(..32)) // Limit to 32 characters
)
  4. Test: Verify that clap correctly rejects inputs exceeding the defined length, providing appropriate error messages.

List of Threats Mitigated:

  • Denial of Service (DoS) via Argument Parsing: (Severity: Medium) - Prevents attackers from supplying excessively long strings that could consume excessive resources during parsing.

Impact:

  • DoS: Significantly reduces the risk of DoS attacks specifically targeting the parsing of long string arguments.

Currently Implemented:

  • List the arguments where value_parser!(String).range(...) (or a similar length-limiting mechanism) is currently used within the clap definition. Example: "username and description arguments have length limits in src/cli.rs."

Missing Implementation:

  • List any string arguments that *do not have length limits enforced within the clap definition. Example: "input_file argument in src/cli.rs lacks a length limit."

Mitigation Strategy: Define Argument Relationships (using clap)

Mitigation Strategy: Define Argument Relationships (using clap)

Description:

  1. Analyze Argument Interactions: Identify how arguments should interact:
    • Conflicts: Which arguments are mutually exclusive (cannot be used together)?
    • Requirements: Does one argument require another to also be present?
    • Conditional Requirements: Is an argument required unless another specific argument is provided?
    • Groups: Can arguments be grouped to enforce mutual exclusivity or other constraints within the group?
  2. Use clap's Relationship Features: Implement these relationships directly in your clap definition using:
    • .conflicts_with("other_arg")
    • .requires("another_arg")
    • .required_unless_present("alternative_arg")
    • .group("group_name") (and then define the group using ArgGroup)
  3. Test Combinations: Thoroughly test various combinations of arguments to ensure clap enforces the defined relationships correctly.

List of Threats Mitigated:

  • Unexpected Behavior: (Severity: Medium) - Prevents the application from entering inconsistent or undefined states due to invalid combinations of arguments.

Impact:

  • Unexpected Behavior: Significantly reduces the risk by ensuring that only valid argument combinations are accepted by clap.

Currently Implemented:

  • Describe which argument relationships are currently defined using clap's features (conflicts_with, requires, etc.). Example: "--input and --output are defined as conflicting in src/cli.rs."

Missing Implementation:

  • List any argument relationships that should be defined but are currently missing from the clap definition. Example: "A requires relationship between --process and --config is missing in src/cli.rs."

Mitigation Strategy: Customize Help Messages (using clap)

Mitigation Strategy: Customize Help Messages (using clap)

Description:

  1. Generate Default Help: Generate the default help output from clap (e.g., by running with --help).
  2. Identify Sensitive Information: Review the default help text for any information that could be useful to an attacker (internal paths, default values, implementation details).
  3. Use clap's Customization Options:
    • .about("Concise description"): Provide a short, general description.
    • .long_about("More detailed, but still sanitized, description"): Offer more detail, but carefully avoid sensitive information.
    • .help_template("{before-help}{usage-heading} {usage}\n{all-args}{after-help}"): Gain complete control over the help message structure and content. Remove or modify sections as needed. You can use placeholders (like {usage}, {all-args}) to control the layout.
  4. Review and Update: Regularly review the customized help messages as the application evolves.

List of Threats Mitigated:

  • Information Leakage via Help Messages: (Severity: Low) - Reduces the risk of inadvertently disclosing sensitive information through overly verbose help text.

Impact:

  • Information Leakage: Reduces the risk, although the impact is generally low unless highly sensitive information is being exposed.

Currently Implemented:

  • Specify whether .about, .long_about, or .help_template are currently used to customize the help output in clap. Example: ".help_template is used to customize the help message in src/cli.rs."

Missing Implementation:

  • Indicate if the help messages are still using the default clap output and haven't been reviewed or customized. Example: "Help messages are using the default clap template and need review."

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Custom Parsers (within clap)

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Custom Parsers (within clap)

Description:

  1. Identify Custom Parsers: Locate any uses of value_parser! with custom logic or custom ValueParser implementations within your clap definitions.
  2. Analyze Parsing Code: Carefully examine the code inside these custom parsers. Look for potential vulnerabilities:
    • Integer overflows/underflows.
    • Buffer overflows.
    • Logic errors.
    • Failure to handle invalid input gracefully.
  3. Implement Robust Validation Within the Parser: Add validation checks directly within the custom parsing logic to ensure the input is safe before it's accepted. This is crucial.
  4. Consider clap's Built-in Parsers: If possible, prefer using clap's built-in value_parser! options (like value_parser!(u32), value_parser!(PathBuf)) over custom logic, as these are generally well-tested.
  5. Fuzz Testing (External, but Recommended): While fuzz testing isn't directly a clap feature, it's highly recommended for custom parsers.

List of Threats Mitigated:

  • Argument Injection / Command Injection (Indirect): (Severity: High) - If the custom parser handles data later used in commands, vulnerabilities within the parser can lead to injection.
    • Denial of Service (DoS): (Severity: Medium) - A poorly written custom parser can be exploited for DoS.
    • Unexpected Behavior: (Severity: Medium) - Parsing errors can lead to unpredictable application states.

Impact:

  • Argument Injection/Command Injection: Robust validation within the custom parser is critical for mitigating this.
    • DoS: Reduces risk by preventing resource exhaustion due to parsing vulnerabilities.
    • Unexpected Behavior: Reduces risk by ensuring correct and safe parsing.

Currently Implemented:

  • Describe where custom parsers are used within the clap definitions.
  • Detail the validation checks that are implemented inside the custom parsing logic. Example: "Custom parser for --date in src/cli.rs checks for valid date format using a regular expression."

Missing Implementation:

  • List any custom parsers that lack thorough validation within their clap implementation. Example: "Custom parser for --complex-data in src/cli.rs needs additional validation to prevent integer overflows."