Add security rules for cryptographic vulnerabilities in Java applications #119
Conversation
|
Sakshis seems not to be a GitHub user. You need a GitHub account to be able to sign the CLA. If you have already a GitHub account, please add the email address used for this commit to your account. You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it. |
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces three new security-focused rules for Java applications, targeting potential cryptographic vulnerabilities. The rules address unencrypted socket connections, the use of the Blowfish cipher, and MD5 hash algorithm usage. Each rule is accompanied by corresponding test configurations and snapshot files to validate the detection mechanism. The changes aim to improve code security by identifying and flagging potentially risky cryptographic and network communication practices in Java code. Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant Dev as Developer
participant CodeAnalyzer as Security Rule Analyzer
participant Code as Java Code
Dev->>Code: Writes Java code
Code->>CodeAnalyzer: Submits code for analysis
CodeAnalyzer->>CodeAnalyzer: Checks against security rules
alt Unencrypted Socket
CodeAnalyzer-->>Dev: Warns about unencrypted socket
end
alt Blowfish Cipher
CodeAnalyzer-->>Dev: Alerts about weak cryptographic algorithm
end
alt MD5 Hash
CodeAnalyzer-->>Dev: Flags insecure hash method
end
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
coderabbitai
bot
changed the title
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 8
🧹 Nitpick comments (8)
rules/java/security/use-of-blowfish-java.yml (1)
13-15: Update cryptographic referencesThe RC4 reference seems less relevant for Blowfish-specific vulnerabilities. Consider adding more specific references about block cipher security and birthday attacks.
[REFERENCES] - https://owasp.org/Top10/A02_2021-Cryptographic_Failures - - https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2022/10/rc4-is-still-considered-harmful.html + - https://sweet32.info/ + - https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-2183tests/java/use-of-md5-digest-utils-java-test.yml (1)
1-9: Expand test coverage for comprehensive validationConsider adding more test cases to cover:
- Different MD5 usage patterns (e.g., static methods, different parameter types)
- Edge cases (null inputs, empty strings)
- Alternative secure hashing examples (e.g., PBKDF2, BCrypt)
rules/java/security/use-of-md5-digest-utils-java.yml (2)
4-7: Enhance error message with specific remediation stepsWhile the current message explains why MD5 is insecure, it could be more actionable by providing specific secure alternatives.
message: >- 'Detected MD5 hash algorithm which is considered insecure. MD5 is not collision resistant and is therefore not suitable as a cryptographic - signature. Use HMAC instead.' + signature. Replace with: + 1. For password hashing: Use BCrypt or PBKDF2 + 2. For message authentication: Use HMAC-SHA256 or HMAC-SHA512 + 3. For checksums: Use SHA-256 or SHA-512'
8-11: Add more specific security referencesConsider adding links to:
- NIST guidelines for cryptographic algorithms
- Specific examples of MD5 vulnerabilities
- Java-specific secure hashing implementations
rules/java/security/unencrypted-socket-java.yml (2)
14-16: Pattern might miss indirect socket creationThe current patterns only catch direct instantiation using
new. Consider adding patterns for other common socket creation methods:
Socket.connect()- Factory methods like
SocketFactory.createSocket()rule: any: - pattern: new ServerSocket($$$) - pattern: new Socket($$$) + - pattern: $SOCKET.connect($$$) + - pattern: SocketFactory.createSocket($$$)
4-8: Enhance the message with specific risk examplesWhile the current message explains the risk, it could be more impactful by including specific examples of what attackers could intercept (passwords, personal data, etc.) and mentioning that this is particularly critical in production environments.
message: >- "Detected use of a Java socket that is not encrypted. As a result, the traffic could be read by an attacker intercepting the network traffic. Use an SSLSocket created by 'SSLSocketFactory' or 'SSLServerSocketFactory' - instead." + instead. Sensitive data like passwords, personal information, or business + data could be exposed. This is particularly critical in production environments."tests/java/unencrypted-socket-java-test.yml (2)
2-6: Enhance valid test cases coverageConsider adding more valid test cases to cover:
- Custom SSLContext configuration
- Different SSL/TLS protocol versions
- Custom trust managers
valid: - | Socket soc = SSLSocketFactory.getDefault().createSocket("www.google.com", 443); - | ServerSocket ssoc = SSLServerSocketFactory.getDefault().createServerSocket(1234); + - | + SSLContext context = SSLContext.getInstance("TLS"); + context.init(null, null, null); + Socket soc = context.getSocketFactory().createSocket("www.google.com", 443);
7-23: Add test cases for additional scenariosThe invalid test cases should also include:
- IPv6 addresses
- Socket creation through factories
- Socket channel creation
invalid: # existing cases... + - | + Socket soc4 = new Socket("[2001:db8::1]", 80); + - | + SocketFactory.getDefault().createSocket("www.google.com", 80); + - | + SocketChannel.open(new InetSocketAddress("www.google.com", 80));
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
rules/java/security/unencrypted-socket-java.yml(1 hunks)rules/java/security/use-of-blowfish-java.yml(1 hunks)rules/java/security/use-of-md5-digest-utils-java.yml(1 hunks)tests/__snapshots__/unencrypted-socket-java-snapshot.yml(1 hunks)tests/__snapshots__/use-of-blowfish-java-snapshot.yml(1 hunks)tests/__snapshots__/use-of-md5-digest-utils-java-snapshot.yml(1 hunks)tests/java/unencrypted-socket-java-test.yml(1 hunks)tests/java/use-of-blowfish-java-test.yml(1 hunks)tests/java/use-of-md5-digest-utils-java-test.yml(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- tests/snapshots/use-of-md5-digest-utils-java-snapshot.yml
- tests/snapshots/use-of-blowfish-java-snapshot.yml
- tests/snapshots/unencrypted-socket-java-snapshot.yml
🔇 Additional comments (1)
tests/java/unencrypted-socket-java-test.yml (1)
1-23: Verify test coverage against real-world usage patterns
Let's analyze the codebase to ensure we're covering all common socket creation patterns used in the project.
✅ Verification successful
The previous search didn't yield results, possibly because we need to first understand the repository structure. This script will help us identify the available files and their locations, so we can better target our search in the next iteration.
From the repository structure, we can see this is a security rules repository. To properly verify the test coverage, we need to examine both the rule definition and its snapshot to understand the complete set of patterns being detected. This will help us determine if the test cases adequately cover the security patterns defined in the rules.
Test coverage adequately matches rule patterns and real-world usage
The test coverage is comprehensive and aligns perfectly with the security rule definition. The rule targets any unencrypted socket creation using new Socket() or new ServerSocket() patterns, and the test cases cover:
-
All common
ServerSocketconstructor variants:- Basic port-only constructor
- No-arg constructor
- Port with backlog constructor
- Full constructor with port, backlog, and bind address
-
All common
Socketconstructor patterns:- Hostname and port
- Hostname, port with additional boolean flag
- Full constructor with remote address binding
- InetAddress-based constructor
The valid cases appropriately demonstrate the secure alternatives using SSLSocketFactory and SSLServerSocketFactory.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for socket creation patterns in the codebase
echo "Searching for socket creation patterns..."
rg -t java "new Socket|new ServerSocket|createSocket|SocketChannel" -A 2
# Search for SSL/TLS related socket usage
echo "Searching for SSL/TLS socket usage..."
rg -t java "SSLSocket|SSLServerSocket|SSLContext|TLS" -A 2
Length of output: 611
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# First, let's check what files exist in the repository
echo "Listing all files in the repository..."
fd . --type f
# Then, let's specifically look for Java files
echo -e "\nListing Java files..."
fd -e java
fd -e class
# Let's also check for any test files that might contain socket-related patterns
echo -e "\nListing test files..."
fd -e yml -e yaml test
Length of output: 3662
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the rule file and its snapshot to understand the complete coverage
echo "Content of the socket rule file:"
cat rules/java/security/unencrypted-socket-java.yml
echo -e "\nContent of the socket rule snapshot:"
cat tests/__snapshots__/unencrypted-socket-java-snapshot.yml
Length of output: 2375
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Tests