(no title)
tob_scott_a | 2 years ago
This could be game-changing for a lot of open source software.
I spent years avoiding X.509 (and ASN.1, for that matter) in my designs because every time someone I trust poked it, a remotely exploitable bug fell out. Most often, it was a Denial of Service issue rather than Remote Code Execution. Moving to Rust would demonstrably improve the security of the entire Internet.
You might be tempted to ask, "What about BouncyCastle?" (or similar queries).
Sure, you're not overwriting the EIP in most Java X.509 bugs, but check the release notes for X.509 and ASN.1 mentions: https://www.bouncycastle.org/releasenotes.html
When I worked for Amazon, we disclosed a few X.509-related vulnerabilities to projects that we almost found by accident.
blibble|2 years ago
they're logic bugs
woodruffw|2 years ago
My understanding is that Java doesn't allow this directly, but has adjacent historical deficiencies (e.g., not allowing exhaustive enumeration handling until recently).
tob_scott_a|2 years ago
Rust isn't just memory-safety. The type system also coaxes developers towards eliminating some types of logic bugs.
Not all, granted, but it does move the needle.
otabdeveloper4|2 years ago
... do absolutely nothing to fix denial of service attacks.
woodruffw|2 years ago
A recent example of this is CVE-2024-0567 in GnuTLS: an invariant that otherwise would likely have been noticed at the type level is instead checked with an assert, leading to a remotely trigger-able DoS.
bagels|2 years ago
saurik|2 years ago
tob_scott_a|2 years ago
The other details covered in the blog post, however, would absolutely do something to fix denial of service attacks.
To wit: x509-limbo