Recursion in Util.java. I suspect that this will lead to issues passing a Google Tier2 CASA
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
Evaluación
- Dificultad
- 2/5
- Tiempo estimado
- 1-3 horas
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 35/100
- Tipo de issue
- Error
- Claridad
- Bastante claro
- Estado de actividad
- Estancado
- Stack tecnológico
- android, java
- Área
- mobile-dev, security
Línea de trabajo
Comienza con el bloque catch de isDebuggableApp referenciado en test-app/app/src/main/java/com/tns/Util.java y, después, inspecciona el punto de entrada isDebuggable() en test-app/runtime/src/main/java/com/tns/Runtime.java. Confirma que la ruta de catch no puede entrar en recursión y verifica que el comportamiento resultante cumple con el comportamiento esperado y aborda la preocupación de análisis reportada.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Descripción
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
- Lenguaje dominante
- C++
- Estrellas
- 563
- Forks
- 144
- Merge medio
- 10 h 46 min
- PR fusionados (30 d)
- 14
Guía de contribución
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Más de NativeScript/android
-
Dificultad 5/5 Más de una semana Aptitud para principiantes 38/100
NativeScript/android#2039 · 1 comentario ·
-
Dificultad 4/5 3-5 días Aptitud para principiantes 48/100
NativeScript/android#2024 ·
-
Dificultad 5/5 Más de una semana Aptitud para principiantes 20/100
NativeScript/android#2020 ·
-
Dificultad 5/5 Más de una semana Aptitud para principiantes 42/100
NativeScript/android#2019 ·
-
Dificultad 4/5 3-5 días Aptitud para principiantes 55/100
NativeScript/android#1986 ·
Todos los issues de NativeScript/android
Issues similares
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 76/100
objectionary/eo-graphs#74 ·
-
Dificultad 1/5 Menos de una hora Aptitud para principiantes 95/100
-
enhancement
Dificultad 1/5 Menos de una hora Aptitud para principiantes 88/100
QuantStack/git2cpp#187 ·
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 86/100
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 72/100