Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
63 lines (52 loc) · 7.27 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

63 lines (52 loc) · 7.27 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for slint-ui/slint

Attack Surface: Compiler Bugs

  • Description: Critical vulnerabilities stemming from errors within the Slint compiler, leading to the generation of flawed and exploitable code.
  • Slint Contribution: Slint's custom compiler processes .slint files. Bugs in this compiler directly translate to vulnerabilities in applications built with Slint.
  • Example: A compiler bug causing incorrect memory management in generated code, leading to a buffer overflow when processing specific UI elements, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution.
  • Impact: Memory corruption, arbitrary code execution, complete system compromise.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Utilize Stable and Audited Slint Compiler Versions: Always use well-vetted, stable releases of the Slint compiler.
    • Advocate for Compiler Security Audits: Encourage and support thorough security audits of the Slint compiler codebase by the Slint development team.
    • Report Suspected Compiler Bugs Immediately: Promptly report any anomalies or suspected compiler bugs to the Slint development team for investigation and patching.

Attack Surface: Memory Safety Issues in Slint Runtime

  • Description: Critical memory corruption vulnerabilities within the Slint runtime library, potentially allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause significant application instability.
  • Slint Contribution: The Slint runtime, written in Rust and potentially C++, manages the execution and rendering of Slint applications. Memory safety flaws in this runtime are direct Slint-introduced vulnerabilities.
  • Example: A use-after-free vulnerability in the Slint runtime's event handling mechanism, triggered by a crafted UI interaction, could allow an attacker to overwrite memory and gain control of the application.
  • Impact: Memory corruption, arbitrary code execution, denial of service, potential for complete system compromise.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Employ Stable and Audited Slint Runtime Versions: Use stable, well-tested versions of the Slint runtime library.
    • Support Runtime Security Audits and Fuzzing: Advocate for and support rigorous security audits and fuzzing of the Slint runtime codebase by the Slint development team.
    • Dependency Management and Updates: Ensure Slint's runtime dependencies are also memory-safe and kept updated to mitigate transitive vulnerabilities.

Attack Surface: Input Handling Vulnerabilities in Slint Runtime (Code Execution)

  • Description: High severity vulnerabilities arising from the Slint runtime's improper handling of external input, specifically leading to potential code execution.
  • Slint Contribution: The Slint runtime processes various inputs, including resources and data bindings. Insufficient input validation within the runtime can create pathways for code execution attacks.
  • Example: A vulnerability in the Slint runtime's image loading functionality, where processing a maliciously crafted image file triggers a buffer overflow that allows arbitrary code execution within the application's context.
  • Impact: Arbitrary code execution, potential for complete system compromise, data breaches.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Robust Input Validation and Sanitization in Slint Runtime: Ensure the Slint runtime implements thorough input validation and sanitization for all external data and resources it processes.
    • Principle of Least Privilege for Slint Applications: Run Slint applications with the minimum necessary privileges to limit the impact of potential exploits.
    • Secure Resource Loading Practices: Implement secure mechanisms for resource loading within Slint, avoiding direct exposure to potentially malicious user-provided paths or data.

Attack Surface: Vulnerabilities in Slint Standard Library Components (Remote Code Execution)

  • Description: High severity vulnerabilities within Slint's standard library components (if provided), specifically those that could lead to remote code execution.
  • Slint Contribution: If Slint offers standard libraries (e.g., for networking), vulnerabilities within these libraries become a direct attack surface introduced by Slint.
  • Example: A vulnerability in a hypothetical Slint networking library's HTTP client, allowing an attacker to send a malicious HTTP response that triggers a buffer overflow and remote code execution within the Slint application.
  • Impact: Remote code execution, potential for complete system compromise, data breaches, network attacks originating from the compromised application.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Rigorous Security Audits of Slint Standard Libraries: Conduct thorough security audits of any standard libraries provided by Slint, especially those handling network communication or external data.
    • Prioritize Well-Vetted External Libraries: Favor the use of established, security-audited external libraries over implementing custom standard libraries within Slint, where feasible.
    • Regular Updates and Patching of Slint and Libraries: Keep Slint and its standard libraries updated to promptly address any discovered vulnerabilities.

Attack Surface: FFI (Foreign Function Interface) Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Critical vulnerabilities arising from insecure interactions between Slint and other programming languages through Foreign Function Interfaces (FFI), potentially leading to code execution or memory corruption.
  • Slint Contribution: Slint's design encourages interoperability with other languages via FFI. Improperly secured FFI boundaries are a direct attack surface introduced by Slint's architecture.
  • Example: Incorrect handling of memory allocation or data type conversions across the FFI boundary between Slint and a C++ backend, leading to a buffer overflow or use-after-free vulnerability exploitable for arbitrary code execution.
  • Impact: Memory corruption, arbitrary code execution, potential for complete system compromise, data breaches.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Employ Secure FFI Coding Practices: Adhere to strict secure coding practices when implementing FFI bridges between Slint and other languages, focusing on memory safety and data validation.
    • Dedicated FFI Security Audits: Conduct focused security audits specifically targeting the FFI interfaces and data exchange mechanisms.
    • Data Validation and Sanitization at FFI Boundaries: Thoroughly validate and sanitize all data crossing the FFI boundary in both directions to prevent injection attacks or data corruption.
    • Minimize FFI Surface Area: Keep FFI interfaces as minimal and simple as possible to reduce the complexity and potential for vulnerabilities.