-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
doc: document dangerous symlink behavior #49154
Conversation
Review requested:
|
Hey @tniessen, do you know some help on this? Feel free to ping me. |
I think it's technically correct as it is, but I'll rephrase it. |
Much earlier, a design decision was made that the permission model should not prevent following symbolic links to presumably inaccessible locations. Recently, after some back and forth, it had been decided that it is indeed a vulnerability that symbolic links, which currently point to an accessible location, can potentially be re-targeted to point to a presumably inaccessible location. Nevertheless, months later, no solution has been found and the issue is deemed unfixable in the context of the current permission model implementation, so it was decided to disclose the vulnerability and to shift responsibiliy onto users who are now responsible for ensuring that no potentially dangerous symlinks exist in any directories that they grant access to. I believe that this design issue might be surprising and that it comes with significant security implications for users, so it should be documented. Original vulnerability report: https://hackerone.com/reports/1961655
05b0b7b
to
1fd427b
Compare
@tniessen the content of that report was closed as "informative", based on what it was discussed at length this is a limitation of the current system, and not a vulnerability that is solvable without some significant redesign, and better handled in public vs private doors. Therefore, no, that's not really a vulnerability per our processes. Could you amend the PR description? |
@mcollina I have updated the PR description. Let me know if anything in there is untrue. For what it's worth, there was agreement that this is a vulnerability. The reason for not following our usual vulnerability procedures was not a reassessment of the issue, but the inability to fix it even after months. |
Landed in 1dc0667 |
Much earlier, a design decision was made that the permission model should not prevent following symbolic links to presumably inaccessible locations. Recently, after some back and forth, it had been decided that it is indeed a vulnerability that symbolic links, which currently point to an accessible location, can potentially be re-targeted to point to a presumably inaccessible location. Nevertheless, months later, no solution has been found and the issue is deemed unfixable in the context of the current permission model implementation, so it was decided to disclose the vulnerability and to shift responsibiliy onto users who are now responsible for ensuring that no potentially dangerous symlinks exist in any directories that they grant access to. I believe that this design issue might be surprising and that it comes with significant security implications for users, so it should be documented. Original vulnerability report: https://hackerone.com/reports/1961655 PR-URL: nodejs#49154 Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Much earlier, a design decision was made that the permission model should not prevent following symbolic links to presumably inaccessible locations. Recently, after some back and forth, it had been decided that it is indeed a vulnerability that symbolic links, which currently point to an accessible location, can potentially be re-targeted to point to a presumably inaccessible location. Nevertheless, months later, no solution has been found and the issue is deemed unfixable in the context of the current permission model implementation, so it was decided to disclose the vulnerability and to shift responsibiliy onto users who are now responsible for ensuring that no potentially dangerous symlinks exist in any directories that they grant access to. I believe that this design issue might be surprising and that it comes with significant security implications for users, so it should be documented. Original vulnerability report: https://hackerone.com/reports/1961655 PR-URL: #49154 Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Much earlier, a design decision was made that the permission model should not prevent following symbolic links to presumably inaccessible locations. Recently, after some back and forth, it had been decided that it is indeed a vulnerability that symbolic links, which currently point to an accessible location, can potentially be re-targeted to point to a presumably inaccessible location. Nevertheless, months later, no solution has been found and the issue is deemed unfixable in the context of the current permission model implementation, so it was decided to disclose the vulnerability and to shift responsibiliy onto users who are now responsible for ensuring that no potentially dangerous symlinks exist in any directories that they grant access to. I believe that this design issue might be surprising and that it comes with significant security implications for users, so it should be documented. Original vulnerability report: https://hackerone.com/reports/1961655 PR-URL: nodejs#49154 Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Much earlier, a design decision was made that the permission model should not prevent following symbolic links to presumably inaccessible locations. Recently, after some back and forth, it had been decided that it is indeed a vulnerability that symbolic links, which currently point to an accessible location, can potentially be re-targeted to point to a presumably inaccessible location. Nevertheless, months later, no solution has been found and the issue is deemed unfixable in the context of the current permission model implementation, so it was decided to disclose the
vulnerabilitypeculiarity and to shift responsibiliy onto users who are now responsible for ensuring that no potentially dangerous symlinks exist in any directories that they grant access to.I believe that this design issue might be surprising and that it comes with significant security implications for users, so it should be documented.
Original vulnerability report: https://hackerone.com/reports/1961655