Ruby 4.0 Universal RCE Deserialization Gadget Chain

Discussion (7 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

Nextgrid•about 2 hours ago

Doesn't this already require to be "on the other side of the airtight hatchway", or am I missing something?

The Marshal.load docs explicitly have a warning that you should not pass it untrusted data: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/master/Marshal.html#module-mar...

Retr0id•about 2 hours ago

Yes, but that doesn't mean defense-in-depth isn't worth doing. The article discusses how known gadgets were removed in the past.

sebiw•about 2 hours ago

Which brings us to the old saying: Do not deserialize untrusted data.

In the context of Rubygems and their specs this obviously is harder to manage but dependencies such as Rubygems are and will always be part of your app's Trusted Computing Base.

sscaryterry•about 1 hour ago

> dependencies such as Rubygems are and will always be part of your app's Trusted Computing Base

This mindset is changing, in the npm ecosystem, managing and updating dependencies have become somewhat of a gamble. It is no longer if, its when you are compromised.

_joel•16 minutes ago

Checksumming the dependencies in the Gemfile may help. https://blog.rubygems.org/2024/12/19/bundler-v2-6.html

wyager•18 minutes ago

> Do not deserialize untrusted data.

I think the better lesson is "use safe codecs"

mono442•13 minutes ago

Quoting the ruby documentation:

> Marshal.load is not suitable as a general purpose serialization format and you should never unmarshal user supplied input or other untrusted data.

Ruby 4.0 Universal RCE Deserialization Gadget Chain

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion (7 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews