diff options
author | Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org> | 2024-04-19 01:47:29 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org> | 2024-04-19 01:47:29 +0000 |
commit | 0ebf5bdf043a27fd3dfb7f92e0cb63d88954c44d (patch) | |
tree | a31f07c9bcca9d56ce61e9a1ffd30ef350d513aa /dom/docs/scriptSecurity/xray_vision.rst | |
parent | Initial commit. (diff) | |
download | firefox-esr-37a0381f8351b370577b65028ba1f6563ae23fdf.tar.xz firefox-esr-37a0381f8351b370577b65028ba1f6563ae23fdf.zip |
Adding upstream version 115.8.0esr.upstream/115.8.0esr
Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'dom/docs/scriptSecurity/xray_vision.rst')
-rw-r--r-- | dom/docs/scriptSecurity/xray_vision.rst | 411 |
1 files changed, 411 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/dom/docs/scriptSecurity/xray_vision.rst b/dom/docs/scriptSecurity/xray_vision.rst new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8a8a093201 --- /dev/null +++ b/dom/docs/scriptSecurity/xray_vision.rst @@ -0,0 +1,411 @@ +Xray Vision +=========== + +.. container:: summary + + Xray vision helps JavaScript running in a privileged security context + safely access objects created by less privileged code, by showing the + caller only the native version of the objects. + +Gecko runs JavaScript from a variety of different sources and at a +variety of different privilege levels. + +- The JavaScript code that along with the C++ core, implements the + browser itself is called *chrome code* and runs using system + privileges. If chrome-privileged code is compromised, the attacker + can take over the user's computer. +- JavaScript loaded from normal web pages is called *content code*. + Because this code is being loaded from arbitrary web pages, it is + regarded as untrusted and potentially hostile, both to other websites + and to the user. +- As well as these two levels of privilege, chrome code can create + sandboxes. The security principal defined for the sandbox determines + its privilege level. If an + Expanded Principal is used, the sandbox is granted certain privileges + over content code and is protected from direct access by content + code. + +| The security machinery in Gecko ensures that there's asymmetric access + between code at different privilege levels: so for example, content + code can't access objects created by chrome code, but chrome code can + access objects created by content. +| However, even the ability to access content objects can be a security + risk for chrome code. JavaScript's a highly malleable language. + Scripts running in web pages can add extra properties to DOM objects + (also known as expando properties) + and even redefine standard DOM objects to do something unexpected. If + chrome code relies on such modified objects, it can be tricked into + doing things it shouldn't. +| For example: ``window.confirm()`` is a DOM + API that's supposed to ask the user to confirm an action, and return a + boolean depending on whether they clicked "OK" or "Cancel". A web page + could redefine it to return ``true``: + +.. code:: JavaScript + + window.confirm = function() { + return true; + } + +Any privileged code calling this function and expecting its result to +represent user confirmation would be deceived. This would be very naive, +of course, but there are more subtle ways in which accessing content +objects from chrome can cause security problems. + +| This is the problem that Xray vision is designed to solve. When a + script accesses an object using Xray vision it sees only the native + version of the object. Any expandos are invisible, and if any + properties of the object have been redefined, it sees the original + implementation, not the redefined version. +| So in the example above, chrome code calling the content's + ``window.confirm()`` would get the original version of ``confirm()``, + not the redefined version. + +.. note:: + + It's worth emphasizing that even if content tricks chrome into + running some unexpected code, that code does not run with chrome + privileges. So this is not a straightforward privilege escalation + attack, although it might lead to one if the chrome code is + sufficiently confused. + +.. _How_you_get_Xray_vision: + +How you get Xray vision +----------------------- + +Privileged code automatically gets Xray vision whenever it accesses +objects belonging to less-privileged code. So when chrome code accesses +content objects, it sees them with Xray vision: + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // chrome code + var transfer = gBrowser.contentWindow.confirm("Transfer all my money?"); + // calls the native implementation + +.. note:: + + Note that using window.confirm() would be a terrible way to implement + a security policy, and is only shown here to illustrate how Xray + vision works. + +.. _Waiving_Xray_vision: + +Waiving Xray vision +------------------- + +| Xray vision is a kind of security heuristic, designed to make most + common operations on untrusted objects simple and safe. However, there + are some operations for which they are too restrictive: for example, + if you need to see expandos on DOM objects. In cases like this you can + waive Xray protection, but then you can no longer rely on any + properties or functions being, or doing, what you expect. Any of them, + even setters and getters, could have been redefined by untrusted code. +| To waive Xray vision for an object you can use + Components.utils.waiveXrays(object), + or use the object's ``wrappedJSObject`` property: + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // chrome code + var waivedWindow = Components.utils.waiveXrays(gBrowser.contentWindow); + var transfer = waivedWindow.confirm("Transfer all my money?"); + // calls the redefined implementation + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // chrome code + var waivedWindow = gBrowser.contentWindow.wrappedJSObject; + var transfer = waivedWindow.confirm("Transfer all my money?"); + // calls the redefined implementation + +Waivers are transitive: so if you waive Xray vision for an object, then +you automatically waive it for all the object's properties. For example, +``window.wrappedJSObject.document`` gets you the waived version of +``document``. + +To undo the waiver again, call Components.utils.unwaiveXrays(waivedObject): + +.. code:: JavaScript + + var unwaived = Components.utils.unwaiveXrays(waivedWindow); + unwaived.confirm("Transfer all my money?"); + // calls the native implementation + +.. _Xrays_for_DOM_objects: + +Xrays for DOM objects +--------------------- + +The primary use of Xray vision is for DOM objects: that is, the +objects that represent parts of the web page. + +In Gecko, DOM objects have a dual representation: the canonical +representation is in C++, and this is reflected into JavaScript for the +benefit of JavaScript code. Any modifications to these objects, such as +adding expandos or redefining standard properties, stays in the +JavaScript reflection and does not affect the C++ representation. + +The dual representation enables an elegant implementation of Xrays: the +Xray just directly accesses the C++ representation of the original +object, and doesn't go to the content's JavaScript reflection at all. +Instead of filtering out modifications made by content, the Xray +short-circuits the content completely. + +This also makes the semantics of Xrays for DOM objects clear: they are +the same as the DOM specification, since that is defined using the +`WebIDL <http://www.w3.org/TR/WebIDL/>`__, and the WebIDL also defines +the C++ representation. + +.. _Xrays_for_JavaScript_objects: + +Xrays for JavaScript objects +---------------------------- + +Until recently, built-in JavaScript objects that are not part of the +DOM, such as +``Date``, ``Error``, and ``Object``, did not get Xray vision when +accessed by more-privileged code. + +Most of the time this is not a problem: the main concern Xrays solve is +with untrusted web content manipulating objects, and web content is +usually working with DOM objects. For example, if content code creates a +new ``Date`` object, it will usually be created as a property of a DOM +object, and then it will be filtered out by the DOM Xray: + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // content code + + // redefine Date.getFullYear() + Date.prototype.getFullYear = function() {return 1000}; + var date = new Date(); + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // chrome code + + // contentWindow is an Xray, and date is an expando on contentWindow + // so date is filtered out + gBrowser.contentWindow.date.getFullYear() + // -> TypeError: gBrowser.contentWindow.date is undefined + +The chrome code will only even see ``date`` if it waives Xrays, and +then, because waiving is transitive, it should expect to be vulnerable +to redefinition: + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // chrome code + + Components.utils.waiveXrays(gBrowser.contentWindow).date.getFullYear(); + // -> 1000 + +However, there are some situations in which privileged code will access +JavaScript objects that are not themselves DOM objects and are not +properties of DOM objects. For example: + +- the ``detail`` property of a CustomEvent fired by content could be a JavaScript + Object or Date as well as a string or a primitive +- the return value of ``evalInSandbox()`` and any properties attached to the + ``Sandbox`` object may be pure JavaScript objects + +Also, the WebIDL specifications are starting to use JavaScript types +such as ``Date`` and ``Promise``: since WebIDL definition is the basis +of DOM Xrays, not having Xrays for these JavaScript types starts to seem +arbitrary. + +So, in Gecko 31 and 32 we've added Xray support for most JavaScript +built-in objects. + +Like DOM objects, most JavaScript built-in objects have an underlying +C++ state that is separate from their JavaScript representation, so the +Xray implementation can go straight to the C++ state and guarantee that +the object will behave as its specification defines: + +.. code:: JavaScript + + // chrome code + + var sandboxScript = 'Date.prototype.getFullYear = function() {return 1000};' + + 'var date = new Date(); '; + + var sandbox = Components.utils.Sandbox("https://example.org/"); + Components.utils.evalInSandbox(sandboxScript, sandbox); + + // Date objects are Xrayed + console.log(sandbox.date.getFullYear()); + // -> 2014 + + // But you can waive Xray vision + console.log(Components.utils.waiveXrays(sandbox.date).getFullYear()); + // -> 1000 + +.. note:: + + To test out examples like this, you can use the Scratchpad in + browser context + for the code snippet, and the Browser Console to see the expected + output. + + Because code running in Scratchpad's browser context has chrome + privileges, any time you use it to run code, you need to understand + exactly what the code is doing. That includes the code samples in + this article. + +.. _Xray_semantics_for_Object_and_Array: + +Xray semantics for Object and Array +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +The exceptions are ``Object`` +and ``Array``: their interesting state is in JavaScript, not C++. This +means that the semantics of their Xrays have to be independently +defined: they can't simply be defined as "the C++ representation". + +The aim of Xray vision is to make most common operations simple and +safe, avoiding the need to access the underlying object except in more +involved cases. So the semantics defined for ``Object`` and ``Array`` +Xrays aim to make it easy for privileged code to treat untrusted objects +like simple dictionaries. + +Any value properties +of the object are visible in the Xray. If the object has properties +which are themselves objects, and these objects are same-origin with the +content, then their value properties are visible as well. + +There are two main sorts of restrictions: + +- First, the chrome code might expect to rely on the prototype's + integrity, so the object's prototype is protected: + + - the Xray has the standard ``Object`` or ``Array`` prototype, + without any modifications that content may have done to that + prototype. The Xray always inherits from this standard prototype, + even if the underlying instance has a different prototype. + - if a script has created a property on an object instance that + shadows a property on the prototype, the shadowing property is not + visible in the Xray + +- Second, we want to prevent the chrome code from running content code, + so functions and accessor properties + of the object are not visible in the Xray. + +These rules are demonstrated in the script below, which evaluates a +script in a sandbox, then examines the object attached to the sandbox. + +.. note:: + + To test out examples like this, you can use the Scratchpad in + browser context for the code snippet, and the Browser Console + to see the expected output. + + Because code running in Scratchpad's browser context has chrome + privileges, any time you use it to run code, you need to understand + exactly what the code is doing. That includes the code samples in + this article. + +.. code:: JavaScript + + /* + The sandbox script: + * redefines Object.prototype.toSource() + * creates a Person() constructor that: + * defines a value property "firstName" using assignment + * defines a value property which shadows "constructor" + * defines a value property "address" which is a simple object + * defines a function fullName() + * using defineProperty, defines a value property on Person "lastName" + * using defineProperty, defines an accessor property on Person "middleName", + which has some unexpected accessor behavior + */ + + var sandboxScript = 'Object.prototype.toSource = function() {'+ + ' return "not what you expected?";' + + '};' + + 'function Person() {' + + ' this.constructor = "not a constructor";' + + ' this.firstName = "Joe";' + + ' this.address = {"street" : "Main Street"};' + + ' this.fullName = function() {' + + ' return this.firstName + " " + this.lastName;'+ + ' };' + + '};' + + 'var me = new Person();' + + 'Object.defineProperty(me, "lastName", {' + + ' enumerable: true,' + + ' configurable: true,' + + ' writable: true,' + + ' value: "Smith"' + + '});' + + 'Object.defineProperty(me, "middleName", {' + + ' enumerable: true,' + + ' configurable: true,' + + ' get: function() { return "wait, is this really a getter?"; }' + + '});'; + + var sandbox = Components.utils.Sandbox("https://example.org/"); + Components.utils.evalInSandbox(sandboxScript, sandbox); + + // 1) trying to access properties in the prototype that have been redefined + // (non-own properties) will show the original 'native' version + // note that functions are not included in the output + console.log("1) Property redefined in the prototype:"); + console.log(sandbox.me.toSource()); + // -> "({firstName:"Joe", address:{street:"Main Street"}, lastName:"Smith"})" + + // 2) trying to access properties on the object that shadow properties + // on the prototype will show the original 'native' version + console.log("2) Property that shadows the prototype:"); + console.log(sandbox.me.constructor); + // -> function() + + // 3) value properties defined by assignment to this are visible: + console.log("3) Value property defined by assignment to this:"); + console.log(sandbox.me.firstName); + // -> "Joe" + + // 4) value properties defined using defineProperty are visible: + console.log("4) Value property defined by defineProperty"); + console.log(sandbox.me.lastName); + // -> "Smith" + + // 5) accessor properties are not visible + console.log("5) Accessor property"); + console.log(sandbox.me.middleName); + // -> undefined + + // 6) accessing a value property of a value-property object is fine + console.log("6) Value property of a value-property object"); + console.log(sandbox.me.address.street); + // -> "Main Street" + + // 7) functions defined on the sandbox-defined object are not visible in the Xray + console.log("7) Call a function defined on the object"); + try { + console.log(sandbox.me.fullName()); + } + catch (e) { + console.error(e); + } + // -> TypeError: sandbox.me.fullName is not a function + + // now with waived Xrays + console.log("Now with waived Xrays"); + + console.log("1) Property redefined in the prototype:"); + console.log(Components.utils.waiveXrays(sandbox.me).toSource()); + // -> "not what you expected?" + + console.log("2) Property that shadows the prototype:"); + console.log(Components.utils.waiveXrays(sandbox.me).constructor); + // -> "not a constructor" + + console.log("3) Accessor property"); + console.log(Components.utils.waiveXrays(sandbox.me).middleName); + // -> "wait, is this really a getter?" + + console.log("4) Call a function defined on the object"); + console.log(Components.utils.waiveXrays(sandbox.me).fullName()); + // -> "Joe Smith" |