界: Encapsulation
封装即绘制强边界。在 Web 浏览器中,这可能意味着确保您的移动代码不会被其他移动代码滥用。在服务器上,这可能意味着区分已验证数据和未验证数据、区分一个用户的数据和另一个用户的数据,或者区分允许用户查看的数据和不允许用户查看的数据。
Trust Boundary Violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 C# 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 C# 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
usrname
参数,再进行检查以确保该用户已经过验证。
usrname = request.Item("usrname");
if (session.Item(ATTR_USR) == null) {
session.Add(ATTR_USR, usrname);
}
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.dotnet.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 Java 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 Java 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
usrname
参数,再进行检查以确保该用户已经过验证。
usrname = request.getParameter("usrname");
if (session.getAttribute(ATTR_USR) != null) {
session.setAttribute(ATTR_USR, usrname);
}
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] FUNDAMENTALS-4: Establish trust boundaries Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.java.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码将一个不可信的项目 (URL) 从 iOS 扩展 JavaScript 脚本传递到 iOS 扩展代码。
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码将一个不可信的项目 (URL) 从 iOS 扩展 JavaScript 脚本传递到 iOS 扩展代码。
var GetURL = function() {};
GetURL.prototype = {
run: function(arguments) {
...
arguments.completionFunction({ "URL": document.location.href });
}
...
};
var ExtensionPreprocessingJS = new GetURL;
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] FUNDAMENTALS-4: Establish trust boundaries Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.javascript.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信任数据和不受信任数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信任未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不受信任的一边移动到可信任的另一边。
当程序使可信任和不受信任的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信任数据和不受信任数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 Kotlin 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信任和不受信任的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信任数据和不受信任数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 Kotlin 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
usrname
参数,再进行检查以确保该用户已经过了验证。
val usrname: String = request.getParameter("usrname")
if (session.getAttribute(ATTR_USR) != null) {
session.setAttribute(ATTR_USR, usrname)
}
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] FUNDAMENTALS-4: Establish trust boundaries Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.kotlin.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的一条分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码将一个不可信的项目从 iOS 扩展传递到
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码将一个不可信的项目从 iOS 扩展传递到
webview
主机。
#import <MobileCoreServices/MobileCoreServices.h>
- (IBAction)done {
...
[self.extensionContext completeRequestReturningItems:@[untrustedItem] completionHandler:nil];
}
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.objc.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码接受了一个
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码接受了一个
usrname
Cookie,并且在对该用户进行身份验证之前,将该值存储在 HTTP DB 会话中。
...
IF (OWA_COOKIE.get('usrname').num_vals != 0) THEN
usrname := OWA_COOKIE.get('usrname').vals(1);
END IF;
IF (v('ATTR_USR') IS null) THEN
HTMLDB_UTIL.set_session_state('ATTR_USR', usrname);
END IF;
...
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.sql.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 Python 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下 Python 代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
username
参数,再进行检查以确保该用户已经过验证。
uname = request.GET['username']
request.session['username'] = uname
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.python.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的一条分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码将一个不可信的项目从 iOS 扩展传递到
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码将一个不可信的项目从 iOS 扩展传递到
webview
主机。
import MobileCoreServices
@IBAction func done() {
...
self.extensionContext!.completeRequestReturningItems([unstrustedItem], completionHandler: nil)
}
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.swift.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
在同一数据结构中将可信赖数据和不可信赖数据混合在一起会导致程序员错误地信赖未验证的数据。
Explanation
信任边界可以理解为在程序中划分的分界线。分界线的一边是不可信赖的数据。分界线的另一边则是被认定为是可信赖的数据。验证逻辑的用途是允许数据安全地跨越信任边界 — 从不可信赖的一边移动到可信赖的另一边。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
当程序使可信赖和不可信赖的分界线模糊不清时,就会发生 Trust Boundary Violation 漏洞。发生这种错误的最普遍方式是允许可信赖的数据和不可信赖的数据共同混合在同一数据结构中。
示例 1:以下代码接受了一个 HTTP 请求,并在 HTTP 会话对象中存储
usrname
参数,再进行检查以确保该用户已经过验证。
...
Dim Response As Response
Dim Request As Request
Dim Session As Session
Dim Application As Application
Dim Server As Server
Dim usrname as Variant
Set Response = objContext("Response")
Set Request = objContext("Request")
Set Session = objContext("Session")
Set Application = objContext("Application")
usrname = Request.Form("usrname")
If IsNull(Session("ATTR_USR")) Then
Session("ATTR_USR") = usrname
End If
...
若不对信任边界进行合理构建及良好维护,则程序员不可避免地会混淆哪些数据已经过验证,哪些尚未经过验证。这种混淆最终会导致某些数据未经验证就加以使用了。
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.vb.trust_boundary_violation