It seems that not many software developers are interested in security. One reason may be that security is a negative feature. Another could be that developers don’t see how security relates to their daily activities. Let’s look at a detailed example that sheds some light on this relation.
Example: Crashing Tetris
My employer, EMC, takes security seriously. Besides the annual security awareness training that every employee has to take, software developers are required to take additional security courses, so that they understand the Security Development Lifecycle. In one of those courses, security guru Hugh Thompson tells the following story.
While on an airplane, he found a Tetris game in the on-board entertainment system. The game showed the next blocks to drop in a preview pane. The game’s settings had up and down buttons to increase or decrease the number of preview blocks.
Using the up button, the number could only be increased to four. However, using the telephone key pad, Thompson could enter
5 and get it accepted.
No higher digits were accepted from the telephone, but now that the number was five, the up button on the screen happily increased the number further.
He increased the number all the way up to 127. The next time he pressed the up button, the screen went black. And so did the screen next to him. And everywhere else in the plane. Zero availability.
Exploits Use Vulnerabilities, Which Come From Bugs
How did this happen? The answer is simple: there were some bugs in the application that were abused in a systematic manner. In the security world, such a bug is referred to as a vulnerability, and the abuse of them to decrease security is known as an exploit.
There is nothing inherently “security related” about vulnerabilities. In the example, the first mistake was that the two interfaces each had their own logic for manipulating the model, a clear violation of DRY. The second was the off-by-one error in the telephone interface. Next, the logic for the up button only checked for the specific boundary value four, instead of for four and anything larger. The final mistake was a missing check for integer overflow. These four more or less innocent bugs combined to form a vulnerability that Thompson exploited.
Certain bugs are more likely to lead to vulnerabilities than others. Two notorious examples are Buffer Overflow and SQL Injection. Luckily, many of such bugs are easily prevented. Good tools and a little awareness on the side of the developer go a long way.
Conclusion: Less Bugs Means More Secure
If vulnerabilities come from bugs, then we need a relentless focus on preventing and eliminating bugs in order to make our applications more secure.
With that insight, we’re firmly back in the land of software development. Security isn’t the big scary monster we developers sometimes think it is.
2 thoughts on “Software Development and Security”