[IPython-dev] Some Thoughts on Notebook Security
Bradley M. Froehle
brad.froehle at gmail.com
Tue Dec 11 00:22:04 EST 2012
Regardless of the approach taken, I think that Carl's suggestion of using separate domains for viewing & editing notebooks should be taken to heart. It does help eliminate one vector of attack.
On Monday, December 10, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Brian Granger wrote:
> I appreciate your thinking about this. It is really important. But I
> think it *may* simple to fix:
> There are two issues we have:
> * In markdown cells users can put arbitrary HTML and JS.
> To fix this, we need to enable the HTML sanitizer that comes with the
> JS Markdown rendered that we are using. This is what StackOverflow
> uses to sanitize their markdown and should completely remove any
> security risks coming from within markdown cells.
> into eval. This only happens when code is run, not when the notebook
> is loaded, so it is less critical, but still needs to be fixed.
> objects altogether.
> Will these two things not completely fix the security problems we
> currently have?
> Now the question is how to enable all of the nice things you can do
> and JSON handlers:
> the person who runs the notebook server once and for all notebooks on
> that server. Similar to how python packages are installed = you do
> this before you start python. To get data from python to the
> to handle them.
> Unless I am misunderstanding the nature of the security risks, I think
> this is what we should do.
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Carl Smith <carl.input at gmail.com (mailto:carl.input at gmail.com)> wrote:
> > The IPython Notebook's vulnerability to cross-site scripting and
> > cross-site request forgery, XSS and XSRF, is a serious problem that
> > provides baddies with a range of attack vectors, each with almost
> > unlimited potential for harm to the user. Attempting to find a single
> > solution to so many problems is overwhelming and almost bound to fail.
> > Therefore, we will likely benefit from breaking the problem down,
> > insofar as we're able.
> > The most obvious place to start is to distinguish between static views
> > of a notebook and a notebook that has a running kernel, which I'll
> > call static notebooks and kernelled notebooks for lack of a
> > convention.
> > A static notebook is just a webpage, so it should ideally behave like
> > static notebooks have this ability is not a concern in itself.
> > Serving all static notebooks from a separate domain should prevent XSS
> > and XSRF attacks because of the Same Origin Policy.
> > Static notebooks, served from a different domain, could be rendered
> > inside iframes, enabling us to embed them inside other webpages and
> > applications. These notebooks would still be superficially served by
> > our own servers, so the UX wouldn't be effected.
> > Using randomised URLs, or some other scheme that does not validate
> > requests by stored credentials, may allow us to serve notebooks from
> > the separate domain while keeping access to the notebooks private.
> > This may be useful when users wish to share a static notebook
> > selectively.
> > removing it altogether. This seems like a bad idea as many static
> > notebooks, particularly in the long run, will need to be able to use
> > never-ending spiral.
> > I think we need to build on browser security, and therefore trust it,
> > rather than build a heap of nasty hacks, which may be circumvented
> > anyway.
> > Just taking it back to basics for a moment: If Malory signs up for a
> > dating site, she might decide to put some dodgy JS inside some script
> > tags, and submit that as part of her profile. If the site doesn't
> > sanitise that HTML, we all know how it plays out; any poor chap that
> > thinks she's a hotty gets pwned. Sanitising her input is textbook.
> > Static notebooks are a totally different scenario. User's will want to
> > include JS and have it work when publishing a static notebook. This is
> > a feature of the Notebook. Furthermore, there's a number of ways to
> > get JS into a static notebook, some more subtle than others, while a
> > dating site is only dealing with text from an input field.
> > I don't have much to say about kernelled notebooks right now, but on
> > statics, I'd like to ask: If we serve a static notebook from a domain
> > which has zero features beyond hosting static notebooks, would those
> > notebooks be able to do anything to a user that a regular webpage
> > couldn't? I'm not a security guy, so I really don't know, but it seems
> > that we'd be totally free to let users publish whatever they liked,
> > with no more restrictions than browsers impose already.
> > I just don't want to see hours of work ploughed into crippling a super
> > powerful feature, if we could just an use extra domain with a simple
> > API instead.
> > Carl
> > _______________________________________________
> > IPython-dev mailing list
> > IPython-dev at scipy.org (mailto:IPython-dev at scipy.org)
> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/ipython-dev
> Brian E. Granger
> Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
> bgranger at calpoly.edu (mailto:bgranger at calpoly.edu) and ellisonbg at gmail.com (mailto:ellisonbg at gmail.com)
> IPython-dev mailing list
> IPython-dev at scipy.org (mailto:IPython-dev at scipy.org)
More information about the IPython-dev