Skip to content

Commit 33fdbb5

Browse files
sam-githubMylesBorins
authored andcommitted
doc: describe what security issues are
PR-URL: #14485 Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
1 parent 2babae4 commit 33fdbb5

File tree

1 file changed

+45
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+45
-0
lines changed

README.md

+45
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -172,6 +172,51 @@ Your email will be acknowledged within 24 hours, and you’ll receive a more
172172
detailed response to your email within 48 hours indicating the next steps in
173173
handling your report.
174174

175+
There are no hard and fast rules to determine if a bug is worth reporting as
176+
a security issue. The general rule is any issue worth reporting
177+
must allow an attacker to compromise the confidentiality, integrity
178+
or availability of the Node.js application or its system for which the attacker
179+
does not already have the capability.
180+
181+
To illustrate the point, here are some examples of past issues and what the
182+
Security Reponse Team thinks of them. When in doubt, however, please do send
183+
us a report nonetheless.
184+
185+
186+
### Public disclosure preferred
187+
188+
- [#14519](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/14519): _Internal domain
189+
function can be used to cause segfaults_. Causing program termination using
190+
either the public Javascript APIs or the private bindings layer APIs requires
191+
the ability to execute arbitrary Javascript code, which is already the highest
192+
level of privilege possible.
193+
194+
- [#12141](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/12141): _buffer: zero fill
195+
Buffer(num) by default_. The buffer constructor behaviour was documented,
196+
but found to be prone to [mis-use](https://snyk.io/blog/exploiting-buffer/).
197+
It has since been changed, but despite much debate, was not considered misuse
198+
prone enough to justify fixing in older release lines and breaking our
199+
API stability contract.
200+
201+
### Private disclosure preferred
202+
203+
- [CVE-2016-7099](https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/september-2016-security-releases/):
204+
_Fix invalid wildcard certificate validation check_. This is a high severity
205+
defect that would allow a malicious TLS server to serve an invalid wildcard
206+
certificate for its hostname and be improperly validated by a Node.js client.
207+
208+
- [#5507](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/5507): _Fix a defect that makes
209+
the CacheBleed Attack possible_. Many, though not all, OpenSSL vulnerabilities
210+
in the TLS/SSL protocols also effect Node.js.
211+
212+
- [CVE-2016-2216](https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/february-2016-security-releases/):
213+
_Fix defects in HTTP header parsing for requests and responses that can allow
214+
response splitting_. While the impact of this vulnerability is application and
215+
network dependent, it is remotely exploitable in the HTTP protocol.
216+
217+
When in doubt, please do send us a report.
218+
219+
175220
## Current Project Team Members
176221

177222
The Node.js project team comprises a group of core collaborators and a sub-group

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)