-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 679
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
proposal: 1.12.2 (50.5.2) move/merge to 12.5.2 (50.5.1) #1406
Comments
Why did you reopen @elarlang? |
Only CSP part remove quick-fix is done, merge to make. |
Requirement history:
The item was originally added in commit 7809c0b. Based on the discussion in #455, it sounds like the main purpose was to promote sandboxing and not just for XSS but in general. I would support keeping this as a separate requirement but moving it to section 12.5 as a practical/implementation requirement. |
Mapping it here: #1009 |
Suggest a small grammar change for 1.12.2 (please do not use dashes in requirements, they are not proper punctuation).
|
Update: those requirements are moved now to the Web Frontend Security category: V50.5 Unintended Content Interpretation
Proposal to merge them is still valid. |
So we now also have:
This seems to replace 50.5.1 definitely. What about 50.5.2? |
Agreed on 50.5.1, 50.5.2 and 50.5.3 merging. How about: Verify that user-uploaded files are never executed as HTML or JavaScript, are served as octet stream downloads or from a separate domain, and implement controls (e.g., Content-Security-Policy: sandbox, Content-Disposition: attachment) to prevent incorrect rendering by browsers. |
Jim - you are cutting so many details and keep proposing a separate domain. Please read previous comments. I prefer we just cover 50.5.1 and 50.5.2 points into current 50.5.3:
edit: finetuned the last sentense |
Sorry @elarlang was moving too fast. I like your version. All is well. |
Tags (the idea: 12.5.2 was moved to 50.5.1 and other 2 requirements were merged into it):
|
ping @tghosth - please recheck before I hit the PR. |
@elarlang that all makes sense to me |
Current v50.6.1:
@elarlang you mentioned elsewhere that you might want to split this back up? What is your proposal? |
So, the theoretical need is to split it because it contains different details that may require a separate level for the requirement. User-uploaded files and API responses containing user-controlled data are for sure level 1. If there are other pieces of content, such as some template files in a public folder, then accessing those is not that risky and can be considered a level 3 requirement. If there is agreement, that the requirement can be level 1 as is, there is no need to split anything. The split is not easy to make without having close-to-duplicate requirements. |
Ok so let's leave it for now, I updated the Google Sheet |
Related issue:
Implement a suitable Content Security Policy (CSP) to reduce the risk from XSS vectors or other attacks from the uploaded file.edit: CSP part is now removed from the requirement text.
CWE-646 - Reliance on File Name or Extension of Externally-Supplied File
Current requirement contains many parts:
CWE-434 - Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type
Proposals:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: