Secure Software doesn't develop itself.

The picture shows the top layer of the Linux kernel's API subsystems. Source: https://www.linux.org/attachments/kernel-jpeg.6497/

Category: Security

Mixing Secure Coding with Programming Lessons

The picture shows a fantasy battle where a witch attacks a wizard with spells. Source: https://wiki.alexissmolensk.com/index.php/File:Spellcasting.jpgLearning about programming first and then learning secure coding afterwards is a mistake. Even if you are new to a programming language or its concepts, you need to know what can go wrong. You need to know how to handle errors. You need to do some basic checks of data received, no matter what your toolchain looks like. This is part of the learning process. So instead of learning how to use code constructs or language features twice, take the shortcut and address security and understanding of the concepts at once. An example method of classes and their behaviour. If you think in instances, then you will have to deal with the occasional exception. No one would learn the methods first, ignore all error conditions, and then get back to learn about errors.

Another example are variables with numerical values. Numbers are notorious. Even the integer data types stay in the Top 25 CWE list since 2019. Integer overflow or underflow simply happens with the standard arithmetic operators. There is no fancy bug involved, just basic counting. You have to implement range checks. There is no way around this. Even Rust requires you to do extra bound checks by using the checked_add() methods. Secure coding always means more code, not less. This starts with basic data types and operators. You can add these logical pitfalls to exercises and examples. By using this approach, you can convey new techniques and how a mind in the security mindset improves the code. There is also the possibility of switching between “normal” exercises and security lessons with a focus on how things go wrong. It’s not helpful to pretend that code won’t run into bugs or security weaknesses. Put the examples of failure and how to deal with it right into your course from the start.

If you don’t know where to start, then consult the secure coding guidelines and top lists of well-known vulnerabilities. Here are some good pointers to get started:

The Ghost of Legacy Code and its Relation to Security

The picture shows a spade and the wall of a pit dug into the earth. The wall shows the different layers created by sedimentation over time. Source: http://www.thesubversivearchaeologist.com/2014/11/back-to-basics-stratigraphy-101.htmlThe words legacy and old carry a negative meaning when used with code or software development. Marketing has ingrained in us the belief that everything new is good and everything old should be replaced to ensure people spend money and time. Let me tell you that this is not the case, and that age is not always a suitable metric. Would you rather have your brain surgery from a surgeon with 20+ years of experience or a freshly graduated surgeon on his or her first day at the hospital?

So what is old code? In my dictionary, the label “not maintained anymore” is assigned to legacy and old code. This is where the mainstream definition fails. You can have legacy code which is still maintained. There is a sound reason for using code like this: stability and fewer errors introduced by creating code from scratch. Reimplementing code always means that you start from nothing. Computer science basic courses teach everyone to reuse code in order to avoid these situations. Basically, reusing code means that you allow code to age. Just don’t forget to maintain parts of your application that work and experience few changes. This is the sane version of old code. There is another one.

An old codebase can serve as a showstopper for changes. If you took some poor design decisions in the past, then parts of your code will resist fresh development and features. Prototypes often exhibit this behaviour (a prototype usually never sees the production phase unaltered). When you see this in your application, then it is time to think about refactoring. Refactoring has fewer restrictions if you can do this in your own code. Once components or your platform is part of the legacy code, then you are in for a major upgrade. Operating systems and run-time environments can push changes to your application by requiring a refactoring. Certifications can do the same. Certain environments only allow certified components. Your configuration becomes frozen once applications or run-time get the certification. All changes may require a re-certification. Voilà, here is your stasis, and your code ages.

Legacy code is not a burden per se. It all depends if the code is still subject to maintenance, patches, and security checks. Besides, older code usually has fewer bugs.

Presentation Supply Chain Attacks and Software Manifests

Today I held a presentation about supply chain attacks and software manifests. The content covers my experience with exploring standards for Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs). While most build systems support creating the manifests, the first step is to identify what components you use and where they come from. Typical software projects will use a mixture of sources such as packet managers from programming languages, operating systems, and direct downloads from software repositories. It is important to focus on the components your code directly relies on. Supporting applications that manage a database or host application programming interfaces (APIs) are a requirement, but usually not part of your software.

The presentation can be found by using this link. The slides are in German, but you will find plenty of links to sources in English.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén