Security Severity Ratings/Client: Difference between revisions
(removing secopstype keyword section: it was moved to the "web" keywords page) |
(updated description and examples for 'sec-other') |
||
Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
;'''sec-other''': sec-other is | ;'''sec-other''': sec-other is used for bugs that are not themselves exploitable security issues but may contain information about other security-sensitive issues that needs to be kept confidential. Note: if the private information is not related to security issues the bug should use "employee confidential" or some other group instead of "security-sensitive" | ||
{| class="wikitable collapsible " style="width: 100%" | {| class="wikitable collapsible " style="width: 100%" | ||
! ''sec-other Examples:'' | ! ''sec-other Examples:'' | ||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
| | | | ||
* Gaps in fuzzing coverage to be addressed | * Gaps in fuzzing coverage to be addressed | ||
* | * Meta bugs tracking a group of related security issues | ||
* A non-security bug where an independent security issue was discovered during the investigation. The separate security issue should be addressed in a new bug, but the original issue needs to remain hidden until the security issue is resolved. | |||
|} | |} | ||
;'''sec-audit''': Bugs marked sec-audit are typically for tasks to investigate a particular component of concern, or pattern of concern. It should NEVER be used for an actual, identified vulnerability. Either a sec-audit bug should cause additional bugs to be opened for specific instances, or a specific bug should cause a sec-audit bug to be opened for investigating variants of the original. | ;'''sec-audit''': Bugs marked sec-audit are typically for tasks to investigate a particular component of concern, or pattern of concern. It should NEVER be used for an actual, identified vulnerability. Either a sec-audit bug should cause additional security bugs to be opened for specific instances, or a specific bug should cause a sec-audit bug to be opened for investigating variants of the original. | ||
{| class="wikitable collapsible " style="width: 100%" | {| class="wikitable collapsible " style="width: 100%" | ||
! ''sec-audit Examples:'' | ! ''sec-audit Examples:'' |
Revision as of 19:50, 15 May 2024
The page pertains specifically to Client Applications: the Firefox web browser and mobile applications. For severity ratings for Mozilla Servers and Web Properties see Security_Severity_Ratings/Web. For details about Mozilla's bug bounty program please visit the bounty pages on our official site.
Severity Ratings
Severity ratings are used to indicate how severe we believe a bug is, and help provide guidance for its urgency and priority. Generally, we ask that they only be assigned by those with experience evaluating vulnerabilities in coordination with the security team. Presently we meet weekly to triage unclassified bugs.
Severity Ratings & Examples | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The following items are keywords for the severity of an issue.
If there are mitigating circumstances that severely constrain the vulnerability, then the issue could be reduced by one level of severity. Examples of mitigating circumstances include difficulty in reproducing due to very specific timing or load order requirements, a complex or unusual set of actions the user would have to take beyond normal browsing behaviors, or an unusual software configuration not provided by our Preferences page. As a rough guide, to be considered for reduction in severity, the vulnerability should be exploitable less than 10% of the time. If in the future, default software configurations change or techniques are developed to improve the reliability of the exploit it should be elevated back to the original rating. |
Alternate Keywords
Sometimes none of the above severity ratings apply to a bug because it is not a vulnerability itself, but nonetheless is security-sensitive for other reasons and needs to be kept private. These keywords apply to those.
While we request that only the security team assign sec-high and similar ratings, we encourage you tag things sec-want and sec-audit if you feel it applies.
Alternate Keywords & Examples | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
A historical keyword is sec-incident, which is no longer used.
Additional Security Keywords, Whiteboard Tracking Tags & Flags
In addition to characterizing the severity of an issue with the sec-
keywords, we also have sub-type keywords, whiteboard tags (standardized string), and flags we can use to further characterize a security issue.
csectype- Keywords
csectype- keywords are assigned to bugs to indicate the type of a vulnerability. Ideally these would be assigned to every vulnerability, but frequently they are not. While we request that only the security team assign sec-high and similar ratings, if you feel you can identify the type of a security bug we encourage you to classify it yourself.
Code | Description |
---|---|
csectype-bounds | client security issues due to incorrect boundary conditions (read or write) |
csectype-disclosure | Disclosure of sensitive user data, personal information, etc in a client product. |
csectype-dos | Used to tag client Denial of Service bugs. For web server denial of service bugs please use wsec-dos as these tend to be more severe. |
csectype-framepoisoning | client security issues prevented using layout's frame poisoning, which usually lowers the severity. |
csectype-intoverflow | client security issues due to integer overflow |
csectype-jit | client security issues due to JIT miscompilation or similar |
csectype-nullptr | client security issue arising from a null pointer being treated as a valid pointer |
csectype-oom | A client crash or hang that occurs in Out Of Memory conditions |
csectype-other | client security issues that don't fit into other categories |
csectype-priv-escalation | client privilege escalation security issues |
csectype-race | client security issue arising from the interaction of multiple threads |
csectype-sandbox-escape | A content process can cause memory corruption or arbitrary/JS code execution in any other process through malformed or tricky IPC messages or Shared Memory |
csectype-sidechannel | client security issue arising from information about a computation being exposed through an external measurement such as time or power |
csectype-sop | violations of the client Same Origin Policy (Universal-XSS bugs, for example). |
csectype-spoof | client security issue from fooling the user into taking the wrong action by presenting incorrect UI |
csectype-uaf | client security issues due to a use-after-free |
csectype-undefined | Bugs--or potential bugs--due to undefined compiler behavior. |
csectype-uninitialized | client security issues due to use of uninitialized memory |
csectype-wildptr | client security issues due to pointer misuse not otherwise covered (see csectype-uaf, csectype-uninitialized, csectype-intoverflow, csectype-bounds) |
Whiteboard Tags
Code | Description |
---|---|
[bad-ram?] | This indicates crashes identified that have no apparant cause and fit the profile of potential bit-flips caused by bad memory. |
[pixel-stealing] | This indicates vulnerabilities related to side-channel attacks on cross-origin resources. |
[fingerprinting] | This indicates user privacy concerns relating to fingerprinting, or web breakage detected from fingerprinting defenses. |
Flags
Flag | Description | Settings | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
sec-bounty | Shows the status of a bug with regards to a bounty payout per our bounty guidlines |
| ||||||||
sec-bounty-hof | Shows the status of a bug with regards to a bounty hall of fame entry |
|