Category: Igalia

Posted on

An Update on WebKit Security Updates

One year ago, I wrote a blog post about WebKit security updates that attracted a fair amount of attention at the time. For a full understanding of the situation, you really have to read the whole thing, but the most important point was that, while WebKitGTK+ — one of the two WebKit ports present in Linux distributions — was regularly releasing upstream security updates, most Linux distributions were ignoring the updates, leaving users vulnerable to various security bugs, mainly of the remote code execution variety. At the time of that blog post, only Arch Linux and Fedora were regularly releasing WebKitGTK+ updates, and Fedora had only very recently begun doing so comprehensively.

Progress report!

So how have things changed in the past year? The best way to see this is to look at the versions of WebKitGTK+ in currently-supported distributions. The latest version of WebKitGTK+ is 2.14.3, which fixes 13 known security issues present in 2.14.2. Do users of the most popular Linux operating systems have the fixes?

  • Fedora users are good. Both Fedora 24 and Fedora 25 have the latest version, 2.14.3.
  • If you use Arch, you know you always have the latest stuff.
  • Ubuntu users rejoice: 2.14.3 updates have been released to users of both Ubuntu 16.04 and 16.10. I’m very  pleased that Ubuntu has decided to take my advice and make an exception to its usual stable release update policy to ensure its users have a secure version of WebKit. I can’t give Ubuntu an A grade here because the updates tend to lag behind upstream by several months, but slow updates are much better than no updates, so this is undoubtedly a huge improvement. (Anyway, it’s hardly a bad idea to be cautious when releasing a big update with high regression potential, as is unfortunately the case with even stable WebKit updates.) But if you use the still-supported Ubuntu 14.04 or 12.04, be aware that these versions of Ubuntu cannot ever update WebKit, as it would require a switch to WebKit2, a major API change.
  • Debian does not update WebKit as a matter of policy. The latest release, Debian 8.7, is still shipping WebKitGTK+ 2.6.2. I count 184 known vulnerabilities affecting it, though that’s an overcount as we did not exclude some Mac-specific security issues from the 2015 security advisories. (Shipping ancient WebKit is not just a security problem, but a user experience problem too. Actually attempting to browse the web with WebKitGTK+ 2.6.2 is quite painful due to bugs that were fixed years ago, so please don’t try to pretend it’s “stable.”) Note that a secure version of WebKitGTK+ is available for those in the know via the backports repository, but this does no good for users who trust Debian to provide them with security updates by default without requiring difficult configuration. Debian testing users also currently have the latest 2.14.3, but you will need to switch to Debian unstable to get security updates for the foreseeable future, as testing is about to freeze.
  • For openSUSE users, only Tumbleweed has the latest version of WebKit. The current stable release, Leap 42.2, ships with WebKitGTK+ 2.12.5, which is coincidentally affected by exactly 42 known vulnerabilities. (I swear I am not making this up.) The previous stable release, Leap 42.1, originally released with WebKitGTK+ 2.8.5 and later updated to 2.10.7, but never past that. It is affected by 65 known vulnerabilities. (Note: I have to disclose that I told openSUSE I’d try to help out with that update, but never actually did. Sorry!) openSUSE has it a bit harder than other distros because it has decided to use SUSE Linux Enterprise as the source for its GCC package, meaning it’s stuck on GCC 4.8 for the foreseeable future, while WebKit requires GCC 4.9. Still, this is only a build-time requirement; it’s not as if it would be impossible to build with Clang instead, or a custom version of GCC. I would expect WebKit updates to be provided to both currently-supported Leap releases.
  • Gentoo has the latest version of WebKitGTK+, but only in testing. The latest version marked stable is 2.12.5, so this is a serious problem if you’re following Gentoo’s stable channel.
  • Mageia has been updating WebKit and released a couple security advisories for Mageia 5, but it seems to be stuck on 2.12.4, which is disappointing, especially since 2.12.5 is a fairly small update. The problem here does not seem to be lack of upstream release monitoring, but rather lack of manpower to prepare the updates, which is a typical problem for small distros.
  • The enterprise distros from Red Hat, Oracle, and SUSE do not provide any WebKit security updates. They suffer from the same problem as Ubuntu’s old LTS releases: the WebKit2 API change  makes updating impossible. See my previous blog post if you want to learn more about that. (SUSE actually does have WebKitGTK+ 2.12.5 as well, but… yeah, 42.)

So results are clearly mixed. Some distros are clearly doing well, and others are struggling, and Debian is Debian. Still, the situation on the whole seems to be much better than it was one year ago. Most importantly, Ubuntu’s decision to start updating WebKitGTK+ means the vast majority of Linux users are now receiving updates. Thanks Ubuntu!

To arrive at the above vulnerability totals, I just counted up the CVEs listed in WebKitGTK+ Security Advisories, so please do double-check my counting if you want. The upstream security advisories themselves are worth mentioning, as we have only been releasing these for two years now, and the first year was pretty rough when we lost our original security contact at Apple shortly after releasing the first advisory: you can see there were only two advisories in all of 2015, and the second one was huge as a result of that. But 2016 seems to have gone decently well. WebKitGTK+ has normally been releasing most security fixes even before Apple does, though the actual advisories and a few remaining fixes normally lag behind Apple by roughly a month or so. Big thanks to my colleagues at Igalia who handle this work.

Challenges ahead

There are still some pretty big problems remaining!

First of all, the distributions that still aren’t releasing regular WebKit updates should start doing so.

Next, we have to do something about QtWebKit, the other big WebKit port for Linux, which stopped receiving security updates in 2013 after the Qt developers decided to abandon the project. The good news is that Konstantin Tokarev has been working on a QtWebKit fork based on WebKitGTK+ 2.12, which is almost (but not quite yet) ready for use in distributions. I hope we are able to switch to use his project as the new upstream for QtWebKit in Fedora 26, and I’d encourage other distros to follow along. WebKitGTK+ 2.12 does still suffer from those 42 vulnerabilities, but this will be a big improvement nevertheless and an important stepping stone for a subsequent release based on the latest version of WebKitGTK+. (Yes, QtWebKit will be a downstream of WebKitGTK+. No, it will not use GTK+. It will work out fine!)

It’s also time to get rid of the old WebKitGTK+ 2.4 (“WebKit1”), which all distributions currently parallel-install alongside modern WebKitGTK+ (“WebKit2”). It’s very unfortunate that a large number of applications still depend on WebKitGTK+ 2.4 — I count 41 such packages in Fedora — but this old version of WebKit is affected by over 200 known vulnerabilities and really has to go sooner rather than later. We’ve agreed to remove WebKitGTK+ 2.4 and its dependencies from Fedora rawhide right after Fedora 26 is branched next month, so they will no longer be present in Fedora 27 (targeted for release in November). That’s bad for you if you use any of the affected applications, but fortunately most of the remaining unported applications are not very important or well-known; the most notable ones that are unlikely to be ported in time are GnuCash (which won’t make our deadline) and Empathy (which is ported in git master, but is not currently in a  releasable state; help wanted!). I encourage other distributions to follow our lead here in setting a deadline for removal. The alternative is to leave WebKitGTK+ 2.4 around until no more applications are using it. Distros that opt for this approach should be prepared to be stuck with it for the next 10 years or so, as the remaining applications are realistically not likely to be ported so long as zombie WebKitGTK+ 2.4 remains available.

These are surmountable problems, but they require action by downstream distributions. No doubt some distributions will be more successful than others, but hopefully many distributions will be able to fix these problems in 2017. We shall see!

Posted on

On Epiphany Security Updates and Stable Branches

One of the advantages of maintaining a web browser based on WebKit, like Epiphany, is that the vast majority of complexity is contained within WebKit. Epiphany itself doesn’t have any code for HTML parsing or rendering, multimedia playback, or JavaScript execution, or anything else that’s actually related to displaying web pages: all of the hard stuff is handled by WebKit. That means almost all of the security problems exist in WebKit’s code and not Epiphany’s code. While WebKit has been affected by over 200 CVEs in the past two years, and those issues do affect Epiphany, I believe nobody has reported a security issue in Epiphany’s code during that time. I’m sure a large part of that is simply because only the bad guys are looking, but the attack surface really is much, much smaller than that of WebKit. To my knowledge, the last time we fixed a security issue that affected a stable version of Epiphany was 2014.

Well that streak has unfortunately ended; you need to make sure to update to Epiphany 3.22.6, 3.20.7, or 3.18.11 as soon as possible (or Epiphany 3.23.5 if you’re testing our unstable series). If your distribution is not already preparing an update, insist that it do so. I’m not planning to discuss the embarrassing issue here — you can check the bug report if you’re interested — but rather on why I made new releases on three different branches. That’s quite unlike how we handle WebKitGTK+ updates! Distributions must always update to the very latest version of WebKitGTK+, as it is not practical to backport dozens of WebKit security fixes to older versions of WebKit. This is rarely a problem, because WebKitGTK+ has a strict policy to dictate when it’s acceptable to require new versions of runtime dependencies, designed to ensure roughly three years of WebKit updates without the need to upgrade any of its dependencies. But new major versions of Epiphany are usually incompatible with older releases of system libraries like GTK+, so it’s not practical or expected for distributions to update to new major versions.

My current working policy is to support three stable branches at once: the latest stable release (currently Epiphany 3.22), the previous stable release (currently Epiphany 3.20), and an LTS branch defined by whatever’s currently in Ubuntu LTS and elementary OS (currently Epiphany 3.18). It was nice of elementary OS to make Epiphany its default web browser, and I would hardly want to make it difficult for its users to receive updates.

Three branches can be annoying at times, and it’s a lot more than is typical for a GNOME application, but a web browser is not a typical application. For better or for worse, the majority of our users are going to be stuck on Epiphany 3.18 for a long time, and it would be a shame to leave them completely without updates. That said, the 3.18 and 3.20 branches are very stable and only getting bugfixes and occasional releases for the most serious issues. In contrast, I try to backport all significant bugfixes to the 3.22 branch and do a new release every month or thereabouts.

So that’s why I just released another update for Epiphany 3.18, which was originally released in September 2015. Compare this to the long-term support policies of Chrome (which supports only the latest version of the browser, and only for six weeks) or Firefox (which provides nine months of support for an ESR release), and I think we compare quite favorably. (A stable WebKit series like 2.14 is only supported for six months, but that’s comparable to Firefox.) Not bad?

Posted on

Epiphany Icon Refresh

We have a nice new app icon for Epiphany 3.24, thanks to Jakub Steiner (Update: and also Lapo Calamandrei):

new-icon
Our new icon. Ignore the version numbers, it’s for 3.24.

Wow pretty!

The old icon was not actually specific to Epiphany, but was taken from the system, so it could be totally different depending on your icon theme. Here’s the icon currently used in GNOME, for comparison:

old-icon
The old icon, for comparison

You can view the new icon it in its full 512×512 glory by navigating to about:web:

big-icon
It’s big (click for full size)

(The old GNOME icon was a mere 256×256.)

Thanks Jakub!

Posted on

Epiphany 3.22 (and a couple new stable releases too!)

It’s that time of year again! A new major release of Epiphany is out now, representing another six months of incremental progress. That’s a fancy way of saying that not too much has changed (so how did this blog post get so long?). It’s not for lack of development effort, though. There’s actually lot of action in git master and on sidebranches right now, most of it thanks to my awesome Google Summer of Code students, Gabriel Ivascu and Iulian Radu. However, I decided that most of the exciting changes we’re working on would be deferred to Epiphany 3.24, to give them more time to mature and to ensure quality. And since this is a blog post about Epiphany 3.22, that means you’ll have to wait until next time if you want details about the return of the traditional address bar, the brand-new user interface for bookmarks, the new support for syncing data between Epiphany browsers on different computers with Firefox Sync, or Prism source code view, all features that are brewing for 3.24. This blog also does not cover the cool new stuff in WebKitGTK+ 2.14, like new support for copy/paste and accelerated compositing in Wayland.

New stuff

So, what’s new in 3.22?

  • A new Paste and Go context menu option in the address bar, implemented by Iulian. It’s so simple, but it’s also the greatest thing ever. Why did nobody implement this earlier?
  • A new Duplicate Tab context menu option on tabs, implemented by Gabriel. It’s not something I use myself, but it seems some folks who use it in other browsers were disappointed it was missing in Epiphany.
  • A new keyboard shortcuts dialog is available in the app menu, implemented by Gabriel.

Gabriel also redesigned all the error pages. My favorite one is the new TLS error page, based on a mockup from Jakub Steiner:

Web app improvements

Pivoting to web apps, Daniel Aleksandersen turned his attention to the algorithm we use to pick a desktop icon for newly-created web apps. It was, to say the least, subpar; in Epiphany 3.20, it normally always fell back to using the website’s 16×16 favicon, which doesn’t look so great in a desktop environment where all app icons are expected to be at least 256×256. Epiphany 3.22 will try to pick better icons when websites make it possible. Read more on Daniel’s blog, which goes into detail on how to pick good web app icons.

Also new is support for system-installed web apps. Previously, Epiphany could only handle web apps installed in home directories, which meant it was impossible to package a web app in an RPM or Debian package. That limitation has now been removed. (Update: I had forgotten that limitation was actually removed for GNOME 3.20, but the web apps only worked when running in GNOME and not in other desktops, so it wasn’t really usable. That’s fixed now in 3.22.) This was needed to support packaging Fedora Developer Portal, but of course it can be used to package up any website. It’s probably only interesting to distributions that ship Epiphany by default, though. (Epiphany is installed by default in Fedora Workstation as it’s needed by GNOME Software to run web apps, it’s just hidden from the shell overview unless you “install” it.) At least one media outlet has amusingly reported this as Epiphany attempting to compete generally with Electron, something I did write in a commit message, but which is only true in the specific case where you need to just show a website with absolutely no changes in the GNOME desktop. So if you were expecting to see Visual Studio running in Epiphany: haha, no.

Shortcut woes

On another note, I’m pleased to announce that we managed to accidentally stomp on both shortcuts for opening the GTK+ inspector this cycle, by mapping Duplicate Tab to Ctrl+Shift+D, and by adding a new Ctrl+Shift+I shortcut to open the WebKit web inspector (in addition to F12). Go team! We caught the problem with Ctrl+Shift+D and removed the shortcut in time for the release, so at least you can still use that to open the GTK+ inspector, but I didn’t notice the issue with the web inspector until it was too late, and Ctrl+Shift+I will no longer work as expected in GTK+ apps. Suggestions welcome for whether we should leave the clashing Ctrl+Shift+I shortcut or get rid of it. I am leaning towards removing it, because we normally match Epiphany behavior with GTK+, and only match other browsers when it doesn’t conflict with GTK+. That’s called desktop integration, and it’s worked well for us so far. But a case can be made for matching other browsers, too.

Stable releases

On top of Epiphany 3.22, I’ve also rolled new stable releases 3.20.4 and 3.18.8. I don’t normally blog about stable releases since they only include bugfixes and are usually boring, so why are these worth mentioning here? Two reasons. First, one of the fixes in these releases is quite significant: I discovered that a few important features were broken when multiple tabs share the same web process behind the scenes (a somewhat unusual condition): the load anyway button on the unacceptable TLS certificate error page, password storage with GNOME keyring, removing pages from the new tab overview, and deleting web applications. It was one subtle bug that was to blame for breaking all of those features in this odd corner case, which finally explains some difficult-to-reproduce complaints we’d been getting, so it’s good to put out that bug of the way. Of course, that’s also fixed in Epiphany 3.22, but new stable releases ensure users don’t need a full distribution upgrade to pick up a simple bugfix.

Additionally, the new stable releases are compatible with WebKitGTK+ 2.14 (to be released later this week). The Epiphany 3.20.4 and 3.18.8 releases will intentionally no longer build with older versions of WebKitGTK+, as new WebKitGTK+ releases are important and all distributions must upgrade. But wait, if WebKitGTK+ is kept API and ABI stable in order to encourage distributions to release updates, then why is the new release incompatible with older versions of Epiphany? Well, in addition to stable API, there’s also an unstable DOM API that changes willy-nilly without any soname bumps; we don’t normally notice when it changes, since it’s autogenerated from web IDL files. Sounds terrible, right? In practice, no application has (to my knowledge) ever been affected by an unstable DOM API break before now, but that has changed with WebKitGTK+ 2.14, and an Epiphany update is required. Most applications don’t have to worry about this, though; the unstable API is totally undocumented and not available unless you #define a macro to make it visible, so applications that use it know to expect breakage. But unannounced ABI changes without soname bumps are obviously a big a problem for distributions, which is why we’re fixing this problem once and for all in WebKitGTK+ 2.16. Look out for a future blog post about that, probably from Carlos Garcia.

elementary OS

Lastly, I’m pleased to note that elementary OS Loki is out now. elementary is kinda (totally) competing with us GNOME folks, but it’s cool too, and the default browser has changed from Midori to Epiphany in this release due to unfixed security problems with Midori. They’ve shipped Epiphany 3.18.5, so if there are any elementary fans in the audience, it’s worth asking them to upgrade to 3.18.8. elementary does have some downstream patches to improve desktop integration with their OS — notably, they’ve jumped ahead of us in bringing back the traditional address bar — but desktop integration is kinda the whole point of Epiphany, so I can’t complain. Check it out! (But be sure to complain if they are not releasing WebKit security updates when advised to do so.)

Posted on

A WebKit Update for Ubuntu

I’m pleased to learn that Ubuntu has just updated WebKitGTK+ from 2.10.9 to 2.12.5 in Ubuntu 16.04. To my knowledge, this is the first time Ubuntu has released a major WebKit update. It includes fixes for 16 security vulnerabilities detailed in WSA-2016-0004 and WSA-2016-0005.

This is really great. Of course, it would have been better if it didn’t take three and a half months to respond to WSA-2016-0004, and the week before WebKitGTK+ 2.12 becomes obsolete was not the greatest timing, but late security updates are much better than no security updates. It remains to be seen if Ubuntu will keep up with WebKit updates in the future, but I think I can tentatively stop complaining about Ubuntu for now. Debian is looking increasingly isolated in not offering WebKit security updates to its users.

Thanks, Ubuntu!

Posted on

Positive progress on WebKitGTK+ security updates

I previously reported that, although WebKitGTK+ releases regular upstream security updates, most Linux distributions are not taking the updates. At the time, only Arch Linux and Fedora were reliably releasing our security updates. So I’m quite pleased that openSUSE recently released a WebKitGTK+ security update, and then Mageia did too. Gentoo currently has an update in the works. It remains to be seen if these distros regularly follow up on updates (expect a follow-up post on this in a few months), but, optimistically, you now have several independent distros to choose from to get an updated version WebKitGTK+, plus any distros that regularly receive updates directly from these distros.

Unfortunately, not all is well yet. It’s still not safe to use WebKitGTK+ on the latest releases of Debian or Ubuntu, or on derivatives like Linux Mint, elementary OS, or Raspbian. (Raspbian is notable because it uses an ancient, insecure version of Epiphany as its default web browser, and Raspberry Pis are kind of popular.)

And of course, no distribution has been able to get rid of old, insecure WebKitGTK+ 2.4 compatibility packages, so many applications on distributions that do provide security updates for modern WebKitGTK+ will still be insecure. (Don’t be fooled by the recent WebKitGTK+ 2.4.10 update; it contains only a few security fixes that were easy to backport, and was spurred by the need to add GTK+ 3.20 compatibility. It is still not safe to use.) Nor have distributions managed to remove QtWebKit, which is also old and insecure. You still need to check individual applications to see if they are running safe versions of WebKit.

But at least there are now several distros providing WebKitGTK+ security updates. That’s good.

Special thanks to Apple and to my colleagues at Igalia for their work on the security advisories that motivate these updates.

Posted on

Epiphany 3.20

So, what’s new in Epiphany 3.20?

First off: overlay scrollbars. Because web sites have the ability to style their scrollbars (which you’ve probably noticed on Google sites), WebKit embedders cannot use a normal GtkScrolledWindow to display content; instead, WebKit has to paint the scrollbars itself. Hence, when overlay scrollbars appeared in GTK+ 3.16, WebKit applications were left out. Carlos García Campos spent some time to work on this, and the result speaks for itself (if you fullscreen this video to see it properly):

Overlay scrollbars did not actually require any changes in Epiphany itself — all applications using an up-to-date version of WebKit will immediately benefit — but I mention it here as it’s one of the most noticeable changes. Read about other WebKit improvements, like the new Faster Than Light FTL/B3 JavaScript compilation tier, on Carlos’s blog.

Next up, there is a new downloads manager, also by Carlos García Campos. This replaces the old downloads bar that used to appear at the bottom of the screen:

Screenshot of the new downloads manager in Epiphany 3.20.

I flipped the switch in Epiphany to enable WebGL:

If you watched that video in fullscreen, you might have noticed that page is marked as insecure, even though it doesn’t use HTTPS. Like most browsers, we used to have several confusing security states. Pages with mixed content received a security warning that all users ignored, but pages with no security at all received no such warning. That’s pretty dumb, which is why Firefox and Chrome have been talking about changing this for a year or so now. I went ahead and implemented it. We now have exactly two security states: secure and insecure. If your page loads any content not over HTTPS, it will be marked as insecure. The vast majority of pages will be displayed as insecure, but it’s no less than such sites deserve. I’m not concerned at all about “warning fatigue,” because users are not generally expected to take any action on seeing these warnings. In the future, we will take this further, and use the insecure indicator for sites that use SHA-1 certificates.

Moving on. By popular request, I exposed the previously-hidden setting to disable session restore in the preferences dialog, as “Remember previous tabs on startup:”

Screenshot of the preferences dialog, with the new "Remember previous tabs on startup" setting.

Meanwhile, Carlos worked in both WebKit and Epiphany to greatly improve session restoration. Previously, Epiphany would save the URLs of the pages loaded in each tab, and when started it would load each URL in a new tab, but you wouldn’t have any history for those tabs, for example, and the state of the tab would otherwise be lost. Carlos worked on serializing the WebKit session state and exposing it in the WebKitGTK+ API, allowing us to restore full back/forward history for each tab, plus details like your scroll position on each tab. Thanks to Carlos, we also now make use of this functionality when reopening closed tabs, so your reopened tab will have a full back/forward list of history, and also when opening new tabs, so the new tab will inherit the history of the tab it was opened from (a feature that we had in the past, but lost when we switched to WebKit2).

Interestingly, we found the session restoration was at first too good: it would restore the page really exactly as you last viewed it, without refreshing the content at all. This means that if, for example, you were viewing a page in Bugzilla, then when starting the browser, you would miss any new comments from the last time you loaded the page until you refresh the page manually. This is actually the current behavior in Safari; it’s desirable on iOS to make the browser launch instantly, but questionable for desktop Safari. Carlos decided to always refresh the page content when restoring the session for WebKitGTK+.

Last, and perhaps least, there’s a new empty state displayed for new users, developed by Lorenzo Tilve and polished up by me, so that we don’t greet new users with a completely empty overview (where your most-visited sites are normally displayed):

Empty State

That, plus a bundle of the usual bugfixes, significant code cleanups, and internal architectual improvements (e.g. I converted the communication between the UI process and the web process extension to use private D-Bus connections instead of the session bus). The best things have not changed: it still starts up about 5-20 times faster than Firefox in my unscientific testing; I expect you’ll find similar results.

Enjoy!

Posted on

Do you trust this application?

Much of the software you use is riddled with security vulnerabilities. Anyone who reads Matthew Garrett knows that most proprietary software is a lost cause. Some Linux advocates claim that free software is more secure than proprietary software, but it’s an open secret that tons of popular desktop Linux applications have many known, unfixed vulnerabilities. I rarely see anybody discuss this, as if it’s taboo, but it’s been obvious to me for a long time.

Usually vulnerabilities go unreported simply because nobody cares to look. Here’s an easy game: pick any application that makes HTTP connections — anything stuck on an old version of WebKit is a good place to start — and look for the following basic vulnerabilities:

  • Failure to use TLS when required (GNOME Music, GNOME Weather; note these are the only apps I mention here that do not use WebKit). This means the application has no security.
  • Failure to perform TLS certificate verification (Shotwell and Pantheon Photos). This means the application has no security against active attackers.
  • Failure to perform TLS certificate verification on subresources (Midori and Xombrero, Liferea). As sites usually send JavaScript in subresources, this means active attackers can get total control of the page by changing the script, without being detected (update: provided JavaScript is enabled). (Regrettably, Epiphany prior to 3.14.0 was also affected by this issue.)
  • Failure to perform TLS certificate verification before sending HTTP headers (private Midori bug, Banshee). This leaks secure cookies, usually allowing attackers full access to your user account on a website. It also leaks the page you’re visiting, which HTTPS is supposed to keep private. (Update: Regrettably, Epiphany prior to 3.14.0 was affected by this issue. Also, the WebKit 2 API in WebKitGTK+ prior to 2.6.6, CVE-2015-2330.)

Except where noted, the latest release of all of the applications listed above are still vulnerable at the time of this writing, even though almost all of these bugs were reported long ago. With the exception of Shotwell, nobody has fixed any of these issues. Perhaps nobody working on the project cares to fix it, or perhaps nobody working on the project has the time or expertise to fix it, or perhaps nobody is working on the project anymore at all. This is all common in free software.

In the case of Shotwell, the issue has been fixed in git, but it might never be released because nobody works on Shotwell anymore. I informed distributors of the Shotwell vulnerability three months ago via the GNOME distributor list, our official mechanism for communicating with distributions, and advised them to update to a git snapshot. Most distributions ignored it. This is completely typical; to my knowledge, the stable releases of all Linux distributions except Fedora are still vulnerable.

If you want to play the above game, it should be very easy for you to add to my list by checking only popular desktop software. A good place to start would be to check if Liferea or Xombrero (supposedly a security-focused browser) perform TLS certificate verification before sending HTTP headers, or if Banshee performs verification on subresources, on the principle that vulnerable applications probably have other related vulnerabilities. (I did not bother to check.)

On a related note, many applications use insecure dependencies. Tons of popular GTK+ applications are stuck on an old, deprecated version of WebKitGTK+, for example. Many popular KDE applications use QtWebKit, which is old and deprecated. These deprecated versions of WebKit suffer from well over 100 remote code execution vulnerabilities fixed upstream that will probably never be backported. (100 is a lowball estimate; I would be unsurprised if the real number for QtWebKit was much, much higher.)

I do not claim that proprietary software is generally more secure than free software, because that is absolutely not true. Proprietary software vendors, including big name corporations that you might think would know better, are still churning out consumer products based on QtWebKit, for example. (This is unethical, but most proprietary software vendors do not care about security.) Not that it matters too much, as proprietary software vendors rarely provide comprehensive security updates anyway. (If your Android phone still gets updates, guess what: they’re superficial.) A few prominent proprietary software vendors really do care about security and do good work to keep their users safe, but they are rare exceptions, not the rule.

It’s a shame we’re not able to do better with free software.

Posted on

Do you trust this website?

TLS certificate validation errors are much less common on today’s Internet than they used to be, but you can still expect to run into them from time to time. Thanks to a decade of poor user interface decisions by web browsers (only very recently fixed in major browsers), users do not understand TLS and think it’s OK to bypass certificate warnings if they trust the site in question.

This is completely backwards. You should only bypass the warning if you do not trust the site.

The TLS certificate does not exist to state that the site is somehow trustworthy. It exists only to state that the site is the site you think it is: to ensure there is no man in the middle (MITM) attacker. If you are visiting https://www.example.com and get a certificate validation error, that means that even though your browser is displaying the URL https://www.example.com, there’s zero reason to believe you’re really visiting https://www.example.com rather than an attack site. Your browser can tell the difference, and it’s warning you. (More often, the site is just broken, or “misconfigured” if you want to be generous, but you and your browser have no way to know that.)

If you do not trust the site in question (e.g. you do not have any user account on the site), then there is not actually any harm in bypassing the warning. You don’t trust the site, so you do not care if a MITM is changing the page, recording your passwords, sending fake data to the site in your name, or whatever else.

But if you do trust the site, this error is cause to freak out and not continue, because it gives you have strong reason to believe there is a MITM attacker. Once you click continue, you should assume the MITM has total control over your interaction with the trusted website.

I will pick on Midori for an example of how bad design can confuse users:

The button label reads "Trust this website," but it should read "I do not trust this website."
The button label reads “Trust this website,” but it should read “I do not trust this website.”

As you can see from the label, Midori has this very wrong. Users are misled into continuing if they trust the website: the very situation in which it is unsafe to continue.

Firefox and Chrome handle this much better nowadays, but not perfectly. Firefox says “Your connection is not secure” while Chrome says “Your connection is not private.” It would be better to say: “This doesn’t look like the real www.example.com.”

Posted on

WebKitGTK+ Gets Security Updates

My recent blog post On WebKit Security Updates has attracted some not-unexpected attention. Since I knew poorly-chosen words could harm the image of the WebKit project, I prefaced that blog post with a disclaimer which I hoped few would miss:

WebKitGTK+ releases regular security updates upstream. It is safe to use so long as you apply the updates.

We have a stable branch that receives only bug fixes for six months, from which we release regular updates including security fixes. This is is comparable to industry standards (consider nine months of support for a Firefox ESR, or less than two months of support for a Chromium release). It is hardly WebKit’s fault that most distributions regularly release security updates for Firefox and Chromium, but not for WebKit.

I reject the notion that we should provide a branch with security fixes and no other bug fixes. Withholding bug fixes is unfair to users, and nobody expects Firefox or Chromium to do this. This feels like a double standard to me.

I also reject the notion that WebKit is too risky to update because it is not a leaf package. I provided a solution to this (carrying separate -stable and -secure packages) in my previous blog post for distributions that are very concerned about unexpected regressions. I don’t think it’s necessary, but it is not exactly rocket science.

I strongly disagree with conclusions that you should stop using WebKit wholesale. You should, however, verify that the version of WebKit offered by your distribution and used in your application is secure. That means (a) ensuring your distribution provides the most-recent stable release (currently 2.10.6 or 2.10.7 are both fine), and (b) ensuring your application is using that release rather than 2.4.x, which will also be packaged by your distribution and is used by most applications. For web browsers, check the Internet for well-known security flaws.

If your distribution is not providing a safe version of WebKit, consider switching to one that does and applying pressure on distributions that irresponsibly ship insecure versions of WebKit. I call on Ubuntu, Debian, openSUSE, and other distributions to follow the lead of Fedora and Arch Linux in providing stable WebKit updates to all users, not just testing branch users.