Recursion in Util.java. I suspect that this will lead to issues passing a Google Tier2 CASA
Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.
Bewertung
- Schwierigkeit
- 2/5
- Geschätzter Aufwand
- 1-3 Stunden
- Anfängerfreundlichkeit
- 35/100
- Issue-Typ
- Bug
- Klarheit
- Größtenteils klar
- Aktivitätsstatus
- Veraltet
- Tech-Stack
- android, java
- Bereich
- mobile-dev, security
Rechercherichtung
Beginnen Sie mit dem referenzierten isDebuggableApp-catch-Block in test-app/app/src/main/java/com/tns/Util.java und untersuchen Sie anschließend den Einstiegspunkt isDebuggable() in test-app/runtime/src/main/java/com/tns/Runtime.java. Bestätigen Sie, dass der catch-Pfad keine Rekursion verursachen kann, und überprüfen Sie, dass das daraus resultierende Verhalten dem erwarteten Verhalten entspricht und die gemeldete Scan-Sorge berücksichtigt.
Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.
Beschreibung
Environment
Provide version numbers for the following components (information can be retrieved by running tns info in your project folder or by inspecting the package.json of the project):
✔ Getting NativeScript components versions information...
✔ Component nativescript has 8.5.3 version and is up to date.
✔ Component @nativescript/core has 8.5.9 version and is up to date.
✔ Component @nativescript/ios has 8.5.2 version and is up to date.
✔ Component @nativescript/android has 8.5.2 version and is up to date.
Describe the bug
Hello together, I am currently preparing for a Tier2 CASA from Google. As I do have to provide Source Code scans using FluidAttacks and it detected a vulnerability in this context of printStackTrace I found the following issue.
public static boolean isDebuggableApp(Context context) {
int flags;
try {
flags = context.getPackageManager().getPackageInfo(context.getPackageName(), 0).applicationInfo.flags;
} catch (NameNotFoundException e) {
flags = 0;
if (Util.isDebuggableApp(context)) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
boolean isDebuggableApp = ((flags & ApplicationInfo.FLAG_DEBUGGABLE) != 0);
return isDebuggableApp;
}
It is clear that printStackTrace() is only called in debug mode. However, I consider telling the guys at Google that this is save code as no good idea as it results in a recursion in the catch block. I would suspect that the e.printStackTrace(); in the catch block is actually never called, hence would it not make sense to completly remove it? I have also seen that the runtime provides
a check for isDebuggableApp. Maybe a save alternative would be to just call com.tns.Runtime.isDebuggable() ?
I do not know the inner workings good enough to know if the runtime always exists at that point. Please consider it as just an idea.
Expected behavior
Catch should not run into a rekursion
Additional context
https://gitlab.com/fluidattacks/universe/-/issues/10406
Currently I am seeing lots of issues in FluidAttacks indirectly referencing this code. Below output is just an example. To my understanding this is a false positive as printStackTrace is not called for production builds. However, also in production builds the recursion would exist to my understanding.
234. Technical information leak - Stacktrace,CWE-209,The error stacktrace can be printed in OWASP/app/src/debug/java/com/tns/ErrorReport.java,CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N/E:U/RL:U/RC:R,https://docs.fluidattacks.com/criteria/vulnerabilities/234,skims,SAST,92,"
82 | final int version = Build.VERSION.SDK_INT;
83 | if (version >= 23) {
84 | try {
85 | // Necessary to work around compile errors with compileSdk 22 and lower
86 | Method checkSelfPermissionMethod;
87 | try {
88 | checkSelfPermissionMethod = ActivityCompat.class.getMethod(""checkSelfPermission"", Context.class, Stri
89 | } catch (NoSuchMethodException e) {
90 | // method wasn't found, so there is no need to handle permissions explicitly
91 | if (Util.isDebuggableApp(activity)) {
> 92 | e.printStackTrace();
93 | }
94 | return;
95 | }
96 |
97 | int permission = (int) checkSelfPermissionMethod.invoke(null, activity, Manifest.permission.WRITE_EXTERNA
98 |
99 | if (permission != PackageManager.PERMISSION_GRANTED) {
100 | // We don't have permission so prompt the user
101 | Method requestPermissionsMethod = ActivityCompat.class.getMethod(""requestPermissions"", Activity.class
102 |
^ Col 0
",java.java_info_leak_stacktrace
- Vorherrschende Sprache
- C++
- Sterne
- 563
- Forks
- 144
- Ø Merge
- 10 Std. 46 Min.
- Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
- 14
Beitragsleitfaden
Erste Schritte
- Lesen Sie das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
- Schreiben Sie ins Issue, dass Sie es übernehmen — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
- Forken Sie das Repository und arbeiten Sie in einem Branch.
- Öffnen Sie einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.
Mehr aus NativeScript/android
-
Schwierigkeit 5/5 Über eine Woche Anfängerfreundlichkeit 38/100
NativeScript/android#2039 · 1 Kommentar ·
-
Schwierigkeit 4/5 3-5 Tage Anfängerfreundlichkeit 48/100
NativeScript/android#2024 ·
-
Schwierigkeit 5/5 Über eine Woche Anfängerfreundlichkeit 20/100
NativeScript/android#2020 ·
-
Schwierigkeit 5/5 Über eine Woche Anfängerfreundlichkeit 42/100
NativeScript/android#2019 ·
-
Schwierigkeit 4/5 3-5 Tage Anfängerfreundlichkeit 55/100
NativeScript/android#1986 ·
Alle Issues in NativeScript/android
Ähnliche Issues
-
Website Doc Typo Offen
Schwierigkeit 1/5 Unter einer Stunde Anfängerfreundlichkeit 92/100
-
Schwierigkeit 1/5 1-3 Stunden Anfängerfreundlichkeit 92/100
autowarefoundation/autoware_universe#13413 ·
-
Schwierigkeit 2/5 1-3 Stunden Anfängerfreundlichkeit 88/100
-
automated-analysis bug memory-safety
Schwierigkeit 2/5 1-3 Stunden Anfängerfreundlichkeit 68/100
-
Schwierigkeit 2/5 1-3 Stunden Anfängerfreundlichkeit 88/100