Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
94 lines (69 loc) · 12.1 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

94 lines (69 loc) · 12.1 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for pistondevelopers/piston

Mitigation Strategy: Input Validation and Sanitization (Piston Context)

  • Description:

    • Step 1: Identify Piston Input Event Handlers: Pinpoint the sections of your code that process Piston input events (e.g., Event::Input, Event::Update loops handling keyboard, mouse, gamepad events).
    • Step 2: Validate Input Data within Event Handlers: Inside these event handlers, implement checks to validate the data within the Piston input events. For example, if you expect specific key codes, verify the Button::Keyboard event contains only those expected codes. If processing text input (less common directly in Piston, but possible via UI libraries), validate the text strings.
    • Step 3: Sanitize Text Input (if used with Piston UI): If your Piston application uses a UI library that handles text input and integrates with Piston events, sanitize any text strings received from the UI before further processing or rendering. This is crucial if displaying user-entered text within the Piston rendered scene.
    • Step 4: Handle Invalid Input Events Gracefully: Decide how your Piston application should react to invalid input events. You might choose to ignore them, log them for debugging, or provide visual feedback to the user if input is unexpected.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Command Injection (Low Severity in typical Piston games): If Piston input is indirectly used to construct commands (unlikely in typical game logic, but possible in custom tooling built with Piston).
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (Low Severity in typical Piston games): If Piston application renders user-provided text in a way that could interpret embedded code (only relevant if Piston is used in a web-integrated context or with a web-based UI).
    • Logic Errors and Unexpected Behavior (Low to Medium Severity): Prevents application crashes or incorrect game logic execution due to unexpected or malformed input events from Piston.

  • Impact:

    • Command Injection: Low reduction in risk in typical Piston games, higher if Piston is used for tooling or systems interacting with OS commands.
    • XSS: Low reduction in risk in typical Piston games, higher if Piston is integrated with web technologies.
    • Logic Errors: Medium to High reduction in risk, preventing unexpected application states due to malformed Piston input.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially Implemented: Piston provides raw input events, but validation is entirely up to the application developer. Rust's type system offers some implicit validation, but explicit checks within Piston event handlers are needed for robust security.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Piston Application Event Handlers: Input validation and sanitization are generally missing in default Piston examples and need to be explicitly implemented within the application's input event processing logic. Developers must add specific validation rules for the types of input events they expect and how they process the data within those events.

Mitigation Strategy: Rate Limiting Input Events (Piston Context)

  • Description:

    • Step 1: Identify Resource-Intensive Piston Event Handlers: Determine which Piston input events trigger resource-intensive operations in your application (e.g., complex physics calculations, network requests initiated by input, heavy rendering updates based on input).
    • Step 2: Implement Rate Limiting within Piston Event Loop: Integrate rate limiting logic directly within your Piston event loop, specifically targeting the identified resource-intensive event handlers.
    • Step 3: Limit Rate of Specific Piston Input Events: Track the frequency of these resource-intensive Piston input events (e.g., Button::Keyboard events for specific keys, MouseMotion events). Implement logic to limit how often these events are processed within a given timeframe.
    • Step 4: Handle Exceeded Rate Limits: When the rate limit for a Piston input event is exceeded, decide how to handle it. Options include dropping the event, delaying its processing, or throttling the associated resource-intensive operation.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Input-Based Denial of Service (DoS) (Medium to High Severity): Prevents attackers from exploiting Piston's event-driven nature to flood the application with rapid input events, overwhelming resources and causing performance degradation or crashes.

  • Impact:

    • Input-Based DoS: Medium to High reduction in risk. Rate limiting within the Piston event loop is effective in mitigating DoS attacks that leverage rapid input event flooding.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Not Implemented: Rate limiting of Piston input events is not a built-in feature of Piston and is not typically implemented in basic Piston examples.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Piston Application's Main Event Loop: Rate limiting logic needs to be added to the application's core Piston event loop, specifically targeting event handlers that are vulnerable to DoS attacks through rapid input. This requires developers to modify their Piston event processing structure to incorporate rate limiting mechanisms.

Mitigation Strategy: Asset File Format and Content Validation (Piston Context)

  • Description:

    • Step 1: Define Allowed Asset Formats for Piston Loading: Specify the permitted file formats for assets loaded using Piston's asset loading mechanisms or any custom asset loading code integrated with Piston. Focus on formats directly used by Piston for textures, audio (if applicable via libraries), or custom data.
    • Step 2: Validate File Format Before Piston Asset Loading: Before using Piston to load an asset file (or before passing the file to a Piston-integrated asset loading library), check the file extension and, ideally, the file's magic number to confirm it matches an allowed format.
    • Step 3: Content Validation for Piston-Loaded Assets: For asset types loaded by Piston or Piston-related libraries (like images for textures), perform content validation. This could involve checking image headers for corruption, validating image dimensions against expected ranges, or verifying the structure of custom data files loaded for game logic.
    • Step 4: Secure Asset Loading Libraries Used with Piston: If your Piston application uses external libraries for asset loading (e.g., image decoding libraries for Piston textures), ensure these libraries are reputable, actively maintained, and updated to patch vulnerabilities.
    • Step 5: Piston Error Handling for Invalid Assets: Implement error handling within your Piston application to gracefully manage situations where asset validation fails. Prevent crashes or unexpected behavior when Piston encounters invalid asset files. Log errors for debugging and security monitoring within the Piston application's logging system.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Malicious File Execution (High Severity): Prevents loading files disguised as Piston-compatible assets that could contain malicious code, potentially exploiting vulnerabilities when Piston or related libraries process them.
    • Buffer Overflow/Memory Corruption (High Severity): Protects against vulnerabilities in asset loading libraries used with Piston that could be exploited by crafted asset files designed to cause memory corruption during Piston asset loading.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Malicious Assets (Medium Severity): Prevents loading assets intended to consume excessive resources (memory, GPU textures) when loaded by Piston, leading to application instability or crashes within the Piston rendering loop.

  • Impact:

    • Malicious File Execution: High reduction in risk by preventing execution of unexpected code through Piston asset loading.
    • Buffer Overflow/Memory Corruption: High reduction in risk by preventing exploitation of vulnerabilities in Piston-related asset loading libraries.
    • DoS via Malicious Assets: Medium reduction in risk. Content validation helps, but resource limits within Piston asset management might also be needed.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially Implemented: Rust's memory safety helps mitigate some memory corruption risks. Piston provides basic asset loading, but format and content validation are primarily the developer's responsibility when using Piston's asset loading features.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Piston Application's Asset Loading Code: Format and content validation are typically not included in basic Piston asset loading examples. Developers need to explicitly add validation checks before using Piston to load assets, especially if loading assets from external or untrusted sources within their Piston application.

Mitigation Strategy: Path Sanitization for Asset Loading (Piston Context)

  • Description:

    • Step 1: Identify User-Controlled Piston Asset Paths: Locate any areas in your Piston application where users can influence the paths used for loading assets via Piston (e.g., configuration files read by Piston, mod loading systems integrated with Piston, command-line arguments affecting Piston asset paths).
    • Step 2: Sanitize Paths Before Piston Asset Loading: Before using user-provided paths with Piston's asset loading functions or related libraries, implement path sanitization to prevent path traversal attacks. This involves:
      • Canonicalization: Convert paths to their canonical form before using them with Piston asset loading.
      • Path Whitelisting: Restrict Piston asset loading to a specific allowed directory or set of directories. Ensure Piston only attempts to load assets from within these whitelisted locations.
      • Input Validation: Validate path components provided by users to ensure they are safe and do not contain malicious sequences like .. before using them in Piston asset loading operations.
    • Step 3: Secure Path Handling with Piston: Use secure path manipulation functions provided by the operating system or libraries when working with asset paths in your Piston application to avoid common path handling errors that could lead to vulnerabilities.
    • Step 4: Test Path Sanitization with Piston Asset Loading: Thoroughly test your path sanitization logic in the context of Piston asset loading to ensure it effectively prevents path traversal attacks when Piston attempts to load assets based on user-provided paths.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Path Traversal Vulnerability (High Severity): Prevents attackers from using manipulated paths to access files outside of the intended asset directories when Piston attempts to load assets, potentially leading to access to sensitive application files or system files through Piston's asset loading mechanisms.

  • Impact:

    • Path Traversal Vulnerability: High reduction in risk if path sanitization is correctly implemented before Piston is used to load assets based on user-provided paths.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Not Implemented: Path sanitization is generally not implemented by default in Piston's asset loading or standard file system operations. It's an application-level security measure that needs to be added when using Piston to load assets from user-defined paths.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Piston Application's Asset Loading and Configuration Code: Path sanitization needs to be implemented in the application's code wherever user-provided paths are used for Piston asset loading or file access. This is particularly important when dealing with user-configurable content or modding support within a Piston game. Developers must ensure paths are sanitized before they are passed to Piston's asset loading functions.