Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
39 lines (32 loc) · 5.76 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

39 lines (32 loc) · 5.76 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for swc-project/swc

Attack Surface: Malicious JavaScript/TypeScript Input - Parser Remote Code Execution

  • Description: Critical vulnerabilities in SWC's parser, when processing malicious JavaScript or TypeScript code, could potentially lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the machine running SWC.
  • SWC Contribution: SWC's core functionality is parsing and processing JavaScript/TypeScript. Parser vulnerabilities are directly within SWC's code.
  • Example: A specially crafted JavaScript file exploits a buffer overflow or memory corruption vulnerability in SWC's parser (written in Rust). When SWC attempts to parse this file, it allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code on the server or developer machine running the build process.
  • Impact: Critical - Remote Code Execution (RCE). Full compromise of the build environment or server running SWC.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Keep SWC Updated: Immediately update SWC to the latest version upon release of security patches addressing parser vulnerabilities.
    • Input Sanitization (Not Recommended for Security): Avoid processing untrusted or externally sourced JavaScript/TypeScript code directly with SWC if possible. If unavoidable, basic input validation before SWC might offer minimal defense-in-depth, but is not a reliable security measure against sophisticated parser exploits. Focus on keeping SWC updated.
    • Sandboxing/Isolation: Run SWC in a sandboxed or isolated environment (e.g., containerized build process) to limit the impact of potential RCE.

Attack Surface: Compiler Bugs - Critical Code Generation Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Critical bugs in SWC's compilation or transformation logic can result in the generation of JavaScript code containing severe security vulnerabilities in the final application.
  • SWC Contribution: SWC is responsible for transforming and generating the final JavaScript code. Critical flaws in this process directly introduce vulnerabilities.
  • Example: A bug in SWC's code optimization or transformation process inadvertently introduces a Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in a commonly used component of the application. For instance, incorrect handling of string escaping during minification could lead to unsanitized user input being directly injected into the DOM in the compiled output.
  • Impact: High - Introduction of critical security vulnerabilities (e.g., XSS, SQL Injection if backend code is generated indirectly, logic flaws leading to authentication bypass) in the deployed application.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Keep SWC Updated: Regularly update SWC to benefit from bug fixes in compilation and transformation logic that could prevent code generation vulnerabilities.
    • Rigorous Testing of Compiled Output: Implement comprehensive security testing (including static analysis, dynamic analysis, and penetration testing) of the compiled application to identify any vulnerabilities introduced by SWC's transformations. Focus on testing the final output, not just the source code.
    • Code Reviews of Critical Transformations (If Possible): For highly sensitive applications, consider reviewing the specific SWC transformations applied to critical code sections to understand potential security implications. While challenging, understanding the transformation pipeline can help identify potential areas of concern.

Attack Surface: Malicious Plugins - Remote Code Execution and Code Injection

  • Description: Malicious SWC plugins, if used, can execute arbitrary code during the compilation process, leading to Remote Code Execution (RCE) and/or inject malicious code directly into the compiled JavaScript output.
  • SWC Contribution: SWC's plugin system allows external code to deeply integrate with and modify the compilation process. This powerful feature becomes a critical attack vector if plugins are compromised or malicious.
  • Example: A developer unknowingly installs a seemingly benign SWC plugin from an untrusted source. This plugin, in reality, contains malicious code that, during the build process, injects a backdoor into the compiled JavaScript application. This backdoor allows the attacker to remotely control the application or access sensitive data.
  • Impact: Critical - Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the build machine, Backdoor injection into the application, full compromise of application security.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Strict Plugin Sourcing: Only use official SWC plugins or plugins from extremely trusted and reputable sources. Exercise extreme caution when considering third-party plugins.
    • Plugin Code Audits (Mandatory for External Plugins): If using any non-official plugin, thoroughly audit the plugin's source code to understand its functionality and ensure it does not contain malicious code or vulnerabilities. This requires significant security expertise.
    • Minimize Plugin Usage: Avoid using plugins unless absolutely necessary. Rely on core SWC functionality whenever possible.
    • Plugin Sandboxing (Feature Request - Future Enhancement): Ideally, SWC (or build systems using SWC) should implement a plugin sandboxing mechanism to limit the capabilities of plugins and restrict their access to system resources and the compilation process. (This is not currently a standard feature but a potential future security improvement).