Skip to content

Commit ea86cb5

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 93a4cf6 commit ea86cb5

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
@@ -173,6 +173,51 @@ Your email will be acknowledged within 24 hours, and you’ll receive a more
173173
detailed response to your email within 48 hours indicating the next steps in
174174
handling your report.
175175

176+
There are no hard and fast rules to determine if a bug is worth reporting as
177+
a security issue. The general rule is any issue worth reporting
178+
must allow an attacker to compromise the confidentiality, integrity
179+
or availability of the Node.js application or its system for which the attacker
180+
does not already have the capability.
181+
182+
To illustrate the point, here are some examples of past issues and what the
183+
Security Reponse Team thinks of them. When in doubt, however, please do send
184+
us a report nonetheless.
185+
186+
187+
### Public disclosure preferred
188+
189+
- [#14519](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/14519): _Internal domain
190+
function can be used to cause segfaults_. Causing program termination using
191+
either the public Javascript APIs or the private bindings layer APIs requires
192+
the ability to execute arbitrary Javascript code, which is already the highest
193+
level of privilege possible.
194+
195+
- [#12141](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/12141): _buffer: zero fill
196+
Buffer(num) by default_. The buffer constructor behaviour was documented,
197+
but found to be prone to [mis-use](https://snyk.io/blog/exploiting-buffer/).
198+
It has since been changed, but despite much debate, was not considered misuse
199+
prone enough to justify fixing in older release lines and breaking our
200+
API stability contract.
201+
202+
### Private disclosure preferred
203+
204+
- [CVE-2016-7099](https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/september-2016-security-releases/):
205+
_Fix invalid wildcard certificate validation check_. This is a high severity
206+
defect that would allow a malicious TLS server to serve an invalid wildcard
207+
certificate for its hostname and be improperly validated by a Node.js client.
208+
209+
- [#5507](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/5507): _Fix a defect that makes
210+
the CacheBleed Attack possible_. Many, though not all, OpenSSL vulnerabilities
211+
in the TLS/SSL protocols also effect Node.js.
212+
213+
- [CVE-2016-2216](https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/february-2016-security-releases/):
214+
_Fix defects in HTTP header parsing for requests and responses that can allow
215+
response splitting_. While the impact of this vulnerability is application and
216+
network dependent, it is remotely exploitable in the HTTP protocol.
217+
218+
When in doubt, please do send us a report.
219+
220+
176221
## Current Project Team Members
177222

178223
The Node.js project team comprises a group of core collaborators and a sub-group

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)