-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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
wasi: clearly document sandboxing & file system security status #50396
Conversation
Review requested:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
their own custom `env`, `preopens`, `stdin`, `stdout`, `stderr`, and `exit` | ||
capabilities. | ||
|
||
**The current Node.js threat model does not provide secure sandboxing as is |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we could mention it in the SECURITY.md file
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As far as I can tell, this is already covered by the existing thread model definition in SECURITY.md for Node.js, unless we want to explicitly call out WASI there?
f3d1496
to
51b029d
Compare
Commit Queue failed- Loading data for nodejs/node/pull/50396 ✔ Done loading data for nodejs/node/pull/50396 ----------------------------------- PR info ------------------------------------ Title wasi: clearly document sandboxing & file system security status (#50396) ⚠ Could not retrieve the email or name of the PR author's from user's GitHub profile! Branch guybedford:wasi-security -> nodejs:main Labels doc, wasi Commits 1 - wasi: clearly document sandboxing & file system security status Committers 1 - Guy Bedford PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson Reviewed-By: James M Snell ------------------------------ Generated metadata ------------------------------ PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson Reviewed-By: James M Snell -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ⚠ Commits were pushed since the last approving review: ⚠ - wasi: clearly document sandboxing & file system security status ℹ This PR was created on Wed, 25 Oct 2023 18:50:44 GMT ✔ Approvals: 2 ✔ - Michael Dawson (@mhdawson) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/50396#pullrequestreview-1698108476 ✔ - James M Snell (@jasnell) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/50396#pullrequestreview-1702811418 ✔ Last GitHub CI successful ℹ Green GitHub CI is sufficient -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ✔ Aborted `git node land` session in /home/runner/work/node/node/.ncuhttps://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/6713160160 |
PR-URL: #50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Landed in ffb326c. |
PR-URL: nodejs#50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #50396 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Currently we use the term "sandbox" in the
node:wasi
documentation, which can be misconstrued as forming a security model.This PR firstly removes the usage of the term "sandbox" and then also updates the docs to include a warning that WASI in Node.js is not a secure capability system and that this is not part of the Node.js threat model. This is very similar to what we already do for the VM module in being clear it does not provide a comprehensive security model for running untrusted code.
Finally, this PR adds a new section on Security to the WASI docs. If we improve the security properties in future, this versioned security documentation can form part of the contract of the implementation so that we can treat the addition of any security guarantees in future as a feature. Perhaps we never get there but it at least leaves the door open to that.
In terms of what would be required to claim our implementation does in fact provide secure sandboxing - the main issue right now is that the filesystem sandboxing is escapable via timing approaches with symlinks. The way to solve this from a security perspective would be to expose the
openat
primitive in libuv and use that to build a secure model. I created a discussion issue for this in libuv/libuv#4167. This would have a slight performance cost, but would form the correct primitive to provide a secure filesystem sandbox.