[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87o79nlwxl.fsf@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2024 22:35:02 +0100
From: Sam James <sam@...too.org>
To: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
Cc: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: escaping terminal control characters (was Re:
backdoor in upstream xz/liblzma leading to ssh server compromise)
Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:03:17AM +1100, Matthew Fernandez wrote:
>> On 4/1/24 08:30, Solar Designer wrote:
>> >On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 04:37:48PM -0000, Tavis Ormandy wrote:
>> >>It was also pointed out they submitted an odd PR to libarchive:
>> >>
>> >>https://github.com/libarchive/libarchive/pull/1609
>> >>
>> >>In summary, they replaced calls to safe_fprintf() with fprintf() --
>> >>meaning control characters are no longer filtered from errors. That
>> >>seems pretty minor, but now that we know they were in the business of
>> >>obfuscating the presence of backdoors -- seems a bit suspicious.
>> >>
>> >>Regardless, that change has now been reverted:
>> >>
>> >>https://github.com/libarchive/libarchive/pull/2101
>> >
>> >This does look minor indeed - not usable for large-scale attacks, and
>> >libarchive is quite unique in that it even bothered to filter control
>> >characters, whereas most command-line tools outputting filenames don't
>> >bother. My guess is it could have been an early experiment to see
>> >whether the project would accept PRs degrading security.
>> >
>> >That said, here's an excellent write-up by David Leadbeater on specific
>> >ways that specific terminal emulators may be usefully attacked with
>> >control sequences:
>> >
>> >https://dgl.cx/2023/09/ansi-terminal-security#vulnerabilities-using-known-replies
>>
>> Is the currently accepted wisdom that any application printing to
>> stdout/stderr should take steps to avoid control characters in the
>> output?
>
> First, let's limit this to cases where the control characters come from
> potentially untrusted input to the program. Obviously, many programs
> generate terminal escapes on their own (usually via a library), for
> their intended functionality (colorized listings, TUIs, etc.) Some
> programs pass potential control characters from their trusted input.
>
> Second, I think no, there isn't currently an established opinion on
> whether programs should perform such filtering of untrusted input.
Lasse has put up an initial implementation for xz:
https://github.com/tukaani-project/xz/pull/118.
Comments are welcome. It was a TODO from a long time ago ;)
We're not sure how much is overkill (or underkill) for this, especially
given it gets harder when Unicode is involved.
> [...]
thanks,
sam
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (378 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
