WebAssembly and Security: a review

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.12297v1
• Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 03:37:28 GMT
• Title: WebAssembly and Security: a review
• Authors: Gaetano Perrone, Simon Pietro Romano,
• Abstract summary: We analyze 121 papers by identifying seven different security categories. We aim to fill this gap by proposing a comprehensive review of research works dealing with security in WebAssembly.
• Score: 0.8962460460173961
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: WebAssembly is revolutionizing the approach to developing modern applications. Although this technology was born to create portable and performant modules in web browsers, currently, its capabilities are extensively exploited in multiple and heterogeneous use-case scenarios. With the extensive effort of the community, new toolkits make the use of this technology more suitable for real-world applications. In this context, it is crucial to study the liaisons between the WebAssembly ecosystem and software security. Indeed, WebAssembly can be a medium for improving the security of a system, but it can also be exploited to evade detection systems or for performing cryptomining activities. In addition, programs developed in low-level languages such as C can be compiled in WebAssembly binaries, and it is interesting to evaluate the security impacts of executing programs vulnerable to attacks against memory in the WebAssembly sandboxed environment. Also, WebAssembly has been designed to provide a secure and isolated environment, but such capabilities should be assessed in order to analyze their weaknesses and propose new mechanisms for addressing them. Although some research works have provided surveys of the most relevant solutions aimed at discovering WebAssembly vulnerabilities or detecting attacks, at the time of writing, there is no comprehensive review of security-related literature in the WebAssembly ecosystem. We aim to fill this gap by proposing a comprehensive review of research works dealing with security in WebAssembly. We analyze 121 papers by identifying seven different security categories. We hope that our work will provide insights into the complex landscape of WebAssembly and guide researchers, developers, and security professionals towards novel avenues in the realm of the WebAssembly ecosystem.

Related papers

• Comparing Security and Efficiency of WebAssembly and Linux Containers in Kubernetes Cloud Computing [0.0]
  This study investigates the potential of WebAssembly as a more secure and efficient alternative to Linux containers for executing untrusted code in cloud computing with containers. Security analyses demonstrate that both Linux containers and WebAssembly have attack surfaces when executing untrusted code, but WebAssembly presents a reduced attack surface due to an additional layer of isolation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T23:35:19Z)
• Adding web pentesting functionality to PTHelper [0.4779196219827506]
  This project is the direct continuation of the previous initiative called PThelper: An open source tool to support the Penetration Testing process. This continuation is focused on expanding PThelper with the functionality to detect and later report web vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T10:05:56Z)
• SoK: Analysis techniques for WebAssembly [0.0]
  WebAssembly is a low-level bytecode language that allows languages like C, C++, and Rust to be executed in the browser at near-native performance. Vulnerabilities in memory-unsafe languages, like C and C++, can translate into vulnerabilities in WebAssembly binaries. WebAssembly has been used for malicious purposes like cryptojacking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-11T14:28:13Z)
• An Exploration Into Web Session Security- A Systematic Literature Review [0.0]
  The most common attacks against web sessions are reviewed in this paper, for example, some attacks against web browsers' honest users attempting to create session with trusted web browser application legally. We have assessed with four different ways to judge the viability of a certain solution by reviewing existing security solutions which prevent or halt the different attacks. The guidelines we have identified will be helpful for the creative solutions proceeding web security in a more structured and holistic way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-14T16:22:07Z)
• When Authentication Is Not Enough: On the Security of Behavioral-Based Driver Authentication Systems [53.2306792009435]
  We develop two lightweight driver authentication systems based on Random Forest and Recurrent Neural Network architectures. We are the first to propose attacks against these systems by developing two novel evasion attacks, SMARTCAN and GANCAN. Through our contributions, we aid practitioners in safely adopting these systems, help reduce car thefts, and enhance driver security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T14:33:26Z)
• Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection [64.67495502772866]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into various applications. We show how attackers can override original instructions and employed controls using Prompt Injection attacks. We derive a comprehensive taxonomy from a computer security perspective to systematically investigate impacts and vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-23T17:14:38Z)
• CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Models [58.27254444280376]
  Large language models (LLMs) for automatic code generation have achieved breakthroughs in several programming tasks. Training data for these models is usually collected from the Internet (e.g., from open-source repositories) and is likely to contain faults and security vulnerabilities. This unsanitized training data can cause the language models to learn these vulnerabilities and propagate them during the code generation procedure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T11:54:07Z)
• Dos and Don'ts of Machine Learning in Computer Security [74.1816306998445]
  Despite great potential, machine learning in security is prone to subtle pitfalls that undermine its performance. We identify common pitfalls in the design, implementation, and evaluation of learning-based security systems. We propose actionable recommendations to support researchers in avoiding or mitigating the pitfalls where possible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-19T13:09:31Z)
• Security and Machine Learning in the Real World [33.40597438876848]
  We build on our experience evaluating the security of a machine learning software product deployed on a large scale to broaden the conversation to include a systems security view of vulnerabilities. We propose a list of short-term mitigation suggestions that practitioners deploying machine learning modules can use to secure their systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-13T16:57:12Z)
• Adversarial Machine Learning Attacks and Defense Methods in the Cyber Security Domain [58.30296637276011]
  This paper summarizes the latest research on adversarial attacks against security solutions based on machine learning techniques. It is the first to discuss the unique challenges of implementing end-to-end adversarial attacks in the cyber security domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-05T18:22:40Z)
• Autosploit: A Fully Automated Framework for Evaluating the Exploitability of Security Vulnerabilities [47.748732208602355]
  Autosploit is an automated framework for evaluating the exploitability of vulnerabilities. It automatically tests the exploits on different configurations of the environment. It is able to identify the system properties that affect the ability to exploit a vulnerability in both noiseless and noisy environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-30T18:49:18Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.