Tag Archives: nashorn

Java Scripting Vulnerabilites

Recently I had to look into processing user inputted expressions which would enable a user to insert control flow logic into a workflow depending on whatever criteria they wish. We are already using JBoss’s jBPMN which is an implementation of BPMN, a standard workflow schema. It is a stable, trusted and widely used tool in the enterprise community.

jBPMN allows the workflow to have “constraints” where you may inject variables or really whatever you wish and supply either Java code or MVEL expressions to evaluate and ultimately control the flow of the workflow. MVEL is just a subset of Java and provides a nice “scripting” feel while maintaining access to all Java objects and classes without the verbosity of Java. With that said, both Java and MVEL are subject to malicious code should as much as if you were running that code directly not in an interpreter. My first thought was that it was likely that either on the MVEL layer or on the jBPMN layer there are some restrictions added in to safeguard the application and the underlying system. I was wrong. I was able to invoke RunTime.getRuntime().exec("rm -rf /") which will obviously yield some pretty devastating results. I’m assuming that jBPMN was never intended to be written for the purposes of allowing external parties to invoke their own code. However, that is precisely what I needed to accomplish without sacrificing the security of the system.

I looked into using Rhino (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Projects/Rhino, https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/scripting/programmer_guide/) which is the standard scripting engine available in Java 7. Rhino has now been taken out of the spotlight as Java 8 offers the new and improved Nashorn JavaScript engine. I didn’t evaluate Nashorn regarding security concerns as the project this was related to was limited to using Java 7. I was able to invoke a slightly differently command as I did with Java/MVEL. With Rhino I needed to provide the entire package name, but the outcome was ultimately the same; I was able to invoke the exact same commands as I did earlier.

I looked around and found this blog post (http://maxrohde.com/2015/08/06/sandboxing-javascript-in-java-app-link-collection/) which led me to a simple little library (https://github.com/javadelight/delight-rhino-sandbox). It combines a number of things including the initSafeStandardObjects() method which removes the Java connection entirely. This library also provides some easy ways to still inject desired objects and data.

The result is with a little bit of code I am able to invoke the sandboxed JavaScript within the jBPMN evaluation and having the inputted script written in JavaScript. All I have done is made it that the constraint evaluation will yield a separate evaluation which is then used to return a boolean value indicating whether or not the corresponding step should be invoked or not. In reality this sort of logic would not be limited to JavaScript via Rhino. Once we are separating the execution from reliance on what jBPMN supports there isn’t anything stopping us from supporting any script language that may be invoked in the JVM or on the host machine.

The end goal is we were able to leverage the stability and power of jBPMN without sacrificing our systems security.