1 | # Porting to the Buffer.from/Buffer.alloc API
|
---|
2 |
|
---|
3 | <a id="overview"></a>
|
---|
4 | ## Overview
|
---|
5 |
|
---|
6 | - [Variant 1: Drop support for Node.js ≤ 4.4.x and 5.0.0 — 5.9.x.](#variant-1) (*recommended*)
|
---|
7 | - [Variant 2: Use a polyfill](#variant-2)
|
---|
8 | - [Variant 3: manual detection, with safeguards](#variant-3)
|
---|
9 |
|
---|
10 | ### Finding problematic bits of code using grep
|
---|
11 |
|
---|
12 | Just run `grep -nrE '[^a-zA-Z](Slow)?Buffer\s*\(' --exclude-dir node_modules`.
|
---|
13 |
|
---|
14 | It will find all the potentially unsafe places in your own code (with some considerably unlikely
|
---|
15 | exceptions).
|
---|
16 |
|
---|
17 | ### Finding problematic bits of code using Node.js 8
|
---|
18 |
|
---|
19 | If you’re using Node.js ≥ 8.0.0 (which is recommended), Node.js exposes multiple options that help with finding the relevant pieces of code:
|
---|
20 |
|
---|
21 | - `--trace-warnings` will make Node.js show a stack trace for this warning and other warnings that are printed by Node.js.
|
---|
22 | - `--trace-deprecation` does the same thing, but only for deprecation warnings.
|
---|
23 | - `--pending-deprecation` will show more types of deprecation warnings. In particular, it will show the `Buffer()` deprecation warning, even on Node.js 8.
|
---|
24 |
|
---|
25 | You can set these flags using an environment variable:
|
---|
26 |
|
---|
27 | ```console
|
---|
28 | $ export NODE_OPTIONS='--trace-warnings --pending-deprecation'
|
---|
29 | $ cat example.js
|
---|
30 | 'use strict';
|
---|
31 | const foo = new Buffer('foo');
|
---|
32 | $ node example.js
|
---|
33 | (node:7147) [DEP0005] DeprecationWarning: The Buffer() and new Buffer() constructors are not recommended for use due to security and usability concerns. Please use the new Buffer.alloc(), Buffer.allocUnsafe(), or Buffer.from() construction methods instead.
|
---|
34 | at showFlaggedDeprecation (buffer.js:127:13)
|
---|
35 | at new Buffer (buffer.js:148:3)
|
---|
36 | at Object.<anonymous> (/path/to/example.js:2:13)
|
---|
37 | [... more stack trace lines ...]
|
---|
38 | ```
|
---|
39 |
|
---|
40 | ### Finding problematic bits of code using linters
|
---|
41 |
|
---|
42 | Eslint rules [no-buffer-constructor](https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-buffer-constructor)
|
---|
43 | or
|
---|
44 | [node/no-deprecated-api](https://github.com/mysticatea/eslint-plugin-node/blob/master/docs/rules/no-deprecated-api.md)
|
---|
45 | also find calls to deprecated `Buffer()` API. Those rules are included in some pre-sets.
|
---|
46 |
|
---|
47 | There is a drawback, though, that it doesn't always
|
---|
48 | [work correctly](https://github.com/chalker/safer-buffer#why-not-safe-buffer) when `Buffer` is
|
---|
49 | overriden e.g. with a polyfill, so recommended is a combination of this and some other method
|
---|
50 | described above.
|
---|
51 |
|
---|
52 | <a id="variant-1"></a>
|
---|
53 | ## Variant 1: Drop support for Node.js ≤ 4.4.x and 5.0.0 — 5.9.x.
|
---|
54 |
|
---|
55 | This is the recommended solution nowadays that would imply only minimal overhead.
|
---|
56 |
|
---|
57 | The Node.js 5.x release line has been unsupported since July 2016, and the Node.js 4.x release line reaches its End of Life in April 2018 (→ [Schedule](https://github.com/nodejs/Release#release-schedule)). This means that these versions of Node.js will *not* receive any updates, even in case of security issues, so using these release lines should be avoided, if at all possible.
|
---|
58 |
|
---|
59 | What you would do in this case is to convert all `new Buffer()` or `Buffer()` calls to use `Buffer.alloc()` or `Buffer.from()`, in the following way:
|
---|
60 |
|
---|
61 | - For `new Buffer(number)`, replace it with `Buffer.alloc(number)`.
|
---|
62 | - For `new Buffer(string)` (or `new Buffer(string, encoding)`), replace it with `Buffer.from(string)` (or `Buffer.from(string, encoding)`).
|
---|
63 | - For all other combinations of arguments (these are much rarer), also replace `new Buffer(...arguments)` with `Buffer.from(...arguments)`.
|
---|
64 |
|
---|
65 | Note that `Buffer.alloc()` is also _faster_ on the current Node.js versions than
|
---|
66 | `new Buffer(size).fill(0)`, which is what you would otherwise need to ensure zero-filling.
|
---|
67 |
|
---|
68 | Enabling eslint rule [no-buffer-constructor](https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-buffer-constructor)
|
---|
69 | or
|
---|
70 | [node/no-deprecated-api](https://github.com/mysticatea/eslint-plugin-node/blob/master/docs/rules/no-deprecated-api.md)
|
---|
71 | is recommended to avoid accidential unsafe Buffer API usage.
|
---|
72 |
|
---|
73 | There is also a [JSCodeshift codemod](https://github.com/joyeecheung/node-dep-codemod#dep005)
|
---|
74 | for automatically migrating Buffer constructors to `Buffer.alloc()` or `Buffer.from()`.
|
---|
75 | Note that it currently only works with cases where the arguments are literals or where the
|
---|
76 | constructor is invoked with two arguments.
|
---|
77 |
|
---|
78 | _If you currently support those older Node.js versions and dropping them would be a semver-major change
|
---|
79 | for you, or if you support older branches of your packages, consider using [Variant 2](#variant-2)
|
---|
80 | or [Variant 3](#variant-3) on older branches, so people using those older branches will also receive
|
---|
81 | the fix. That way, you will eradicate potential issues caused by unguarded Buffer API usage and
|
---|
82 | your users will not observe a runtime deprecation warning when running your code on Node.js 10._
|
---|
83 |
|
---|
84 | <a id="variant-2"></a>
|
---|
85 | ## Variant 2: Use a polyfill
|
---|
86 |
|
---|
87 | Utilize [safer-buffer](https://www.npmjs.com/package/safer-buffer) as a polyfill to support older
|
---|
88 | Node.js versions.
|
---|
89 |
|
---|
90 | You would take exacly the same steps as in [Variant 1](#variant-1), but with a polyfill
|
---|
91 | `const Buffer = require('safer-buffer').Buffer` in all files where you use the new `Buffer` api.
|
---|
92 |
|
---|
93 | Make sure that you do not use old `new Buffer` API — in any files where the line above is added,
|
---|
94 | using old `new Buffer()` API will _throw_. It will be easy to notice that in CI, though.
|
---|
95 |
|
---|
96 | Alternatively, you could use [buffer-from](https://www.npmjs.com/package/buffer-from) and/or
|
---|
97 | [buffer-alloc](https://www.npmjs.com/package/buffer-alloc) [ponyfills](https://ponyfill.com/) —
|
---|
98 | those are great, the only downsides being 4 deps in the tree and slightly more code changes to
|
---|
99 | migrate off them (as you would be using e.g. `Buffer.from` under a different name). If you need only
|
---|
100 | `Buffer.from` polyfilled — `buffer-from` alone which comes with no extra dependencies.
|
---|
101 |
|
---|
102 | _Alternatively, you could use [safe-buffer](https://www.npmjs.com/package/safe-buffer) — it also
|
---|
103 | provides a polyfill, but takes a different approach which has
|
---|
104 | [it's drawbacks](https://github.com/chalker/safer-buffer#why-not-safe-buffer). It will allow you
|
---|
105 | to also use the older `new Buffer()` API in your code, though — but that's arguably a benefit, as
|
---|
106 | it is problematic, can cause issues in your code, and will start emitting runtime deprecation
|
---|
107 | warnings starting with Node.js 10._
|
---|
108 |
|
---|
109 | Note that in either case, it is important that you also remove all calls to the old Buffer
|
---|
110 | API manually — just throwing in `safe-buffer` doesn't fix the problem by itself, it just provides
|
---|
111 | a polyfill for the new API. I have seen people doing that mistake.
|
---|
112 |
|
---|
113 | Enabling eslint rule [no-buffer-constructor](https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-buffer-constructor)
|
---|
114 | or
|
---|
115 | [node/no-deprecated-api](https://github.com/mysticatea/eslint-plugin-node/blob/master/docs/rules/no-deprecated-api.md)
|
---|
116 | is recommended.
|
---|
117 |
|
---|
118 | _Don't forget to drop the polyfill usage once you drop support for Node.js < 4.5.0._
|
---|
119 |
|
---|
120 | <a id="variant-3"></a>
|
---|
121 | ## Variant 3 — manual detection, with safeguards
|
---|
122 |
|
---|
123 | This is useful if you create Buffer instances in only a few places (e.g. one), or you have your own
|
---|
124 | wrapper around them.
|
---|
125 |
|
---|
126 | ### Buffer(0)
|
---|
127 |
|
---|
128 | This special case for creating empty buffers can be safely replaced with `Buffer.concat([])`, which
|
---|
129 | returns the same result all the way down to Node.js 0.8.x.
|
---|
130 |
|
---|
131 | ### Buffer(notNumber)
|
---|
132 |
|
---|
133 | Before:
|
---|
134 |
|
---|
135 | ```js
|
---|
136 | var buf = new Buffer(notNumber, encoding);
|
---|
137 | ```
|
---|
138 |
|
---|
139 | After:
|
---|
140 |
|
---|
141 | ```js
|
---|
142 | var buf;
|
---|
143 | if (Buffer.from && Buffer.from !== Uint8Array.from) {
|
---|
144 | buf = Buffer.from(notNumber, encoding);
|
---|
145 | } else {
|
---|
146 | if (typeof notNumber === 'number')
|
---|
147 | throw new Error('The "size" argument must be of type number.');
|
---|
148 | buf = new Buffer(notNumber, encoding);
|
---|
149 | }
|
---|
150 | ```
|
---|
151 |
|
---|
152 | `encoding` is optional.
|
---|
153 |
|
---|
154 | Note that the `typeof notNumber` before `new Buffer` is required (for cases when `notNumber` argument is not
|
---|
155 | hard-coded) and _is not caused by the deprecation of Buffer constructor_ — it's exactly _why_ the
|
---|
156 | Buffer constructor is deprecated. Ecosystem packages lacking this type-check caused numereous
|
---|
157 | security issues — situations when unsanitized user input could end up in the `Buffer(arg)` create
|
---|
158 | problems ranging from DoS to leaking sensitive information to the attacker from the process memory.
|
---|
159 |
|
---|
160 | When `notNumber` argument is hardcoded (e.g. literal `"abc"` or `[0,1,2]`), the `typeof` check can
|
---|
161 | be omitted.
|
---|
162 |
|
---|
163 | Also note that using TypeScript does not fix this problem for you — when libs written in
|
---|
164 | `TypeScript` are used from JS, or when user input ends up there — it behaves exactly as pure JS, as
|
---|
165 | all type checks are translation-time only and are not present in the actual JS code which TS
|
---|
166 | compiles to.
|
---|
167 |
|
---|
168 | ### Buffer(number)
|
---|
169 |
|
---|
170 | For Node.js 0.10.x (and below) support:
|
---|
171 |
|
---|
172 | ```js
|
---|
173 | var buf;
|
---|
174 | if (Buffer.alloc) {
|
---|
175 | buf = Buffer.alloc(number);
|
---|
176 | } else {
|
---|
177 | buf = new Buffer(number);
|
---|
178 | buf.fill(0);
|
---|
179 | }
|
---|
180 | ```
|
---|
181 |
|
---|
182 | Otherwise (Node.js ≥ 0.12.x):
|
---|
183 |
|
---|
184 | ```js
|
---|
185 | const buf = Buffer.alloc ? Buffer.alloc(number) : new Buffer(number).fill(0);
|
---|
186 | ```
|
---|
187 |
|
---|
188 | ## Regarding Buffer.allocUnsafe
|
---|
189 |
|
---|
190 | Be extra cautious when using `Buffer.allocUnsafe`:
|
---|
191 | * Don't use it if you don't have a good reason to
|
---|
192 | * e.g. you probably won't ever see a performance difference for small buffers, in fact, those
|
---|
193 | might be even faster with `Buffer.alloc()`,
|
---|
194 | * if your code is not in the hot code path — you also probably won't notice a difference,
|
---|
195 | * keep in mind that zero-filling minimizes the potential risks.
|
---|
196 | * If you use it, make sure that you never return the buffer in a partially-filled state,
|
---|
197 | * if you are writing to it sequentially — always truncate it to the actuall written length
|
---|
198 |
|
---|
199 | Errors in handling buffers allocated with `Buffer.allocUnsafe` could result in various issues,
|
---|
200 | ranged from undefined behaviour of your code to sensitive data (user input, passwords, certs)
|
---|
201 | leaking to the remote attacker.
|
---|
202 |
|
---|
203 | _Note that the same applies to `new Buffer` usage without zero-filling, depending on the Node.js
|
---|
204 | version (and lacking type checks also adds DoS to the list of potential problems)._
|
---|
205 |
|
---|
206 | <a id="faq"></a>
|
---|
207 | ## FAQ
|
---|
208 |
|
---|
209 | <a id="design-flaws"></a>
|
---|
210 | ### What is wrong with the `Buffer` constructor?
|
---|
211 |
|
---|
212 | The `Buffer` constructor could be used to create a buffer in many different ways:
|
---|
213 |
|
---|
214 | - `new Buffer(42)` creates a `Buffer` of 42 bytes. Before Node.js 8, this buffer contained
|
---|
215 | *arbitrary memory* for performance reasons, which could include anything ranging from
|
---|
216 | program source code to passwords and encryption keys.
|
---|
217 | - `new Buffer('abc')` creates a `Buffer` that contains the UTF-8-encoded version of
|
---|
218 | the string `'abc'`. A second argument could specify another encoding: For example,
|
---|
219 | `new Buffer(string, 'base64')` could be used to convert a Base64 string into the original
|
---|
220 | sequence of bytes that it represents.
|
---|
221 | - There are several other combinations of arguments.
|
---|
222 |
|
---|
223 | This meant that, in code like `var buffer = new Buffer(foo);`, *it is not possible to tell
|
---|
224 | what exactly the contents of the generated buffer are* without knowing the type of `foo`.
|
---|
225 |
|
---|
226 | Sometimes, the value of `foo` comes from an external source. For example, this function
|
---|
227 | could be exposed as a service on a web server, converting a UTF-8 string into its Base64 form:
|
---|
228 |
|
---|
229 | ```
|
---|
230 | function stringToBase64(req, res) {
|
---|
231 | // The request body should have the format of `{ string: 'foobar' }`
|
---|
232 | const rawBytes = new Buffer(req.body.string)
|
---|
233 | const encoded = rawBytes.toString('base64')
|
---|
234 | res.end({ encoded: encoded })
|
---|
235 | }
|
---|
236 | ```
|
---|
237 |
|
---|
238 | Note that this code does *not* validate the type of `req.body.string`:
|
---|
239 |
|
---|
240 | - `req.body.string` is expected to be a string. If this is the case, all goes well.
|
---|
241 | - `req.body.string` is controlled by the client that sends the request.
|
---|
242 | - If `req.body.string` is the *number* `50`, the `rawBytes` would be 50 bytes:
|
---|
243 | - Before Node.js 8, the content would be uninitialized
|
---|
244 | - After Node.js 8, the content would be `50` bytes with the value `0`
|
---|
245 |
|
---|
246 | Because of the missing type check, an attacker could intentionally send a number
|
---|
247 | as part of the request. Using this, they can either:
|
---|
248 |
|
---|
249 | - Read uninitialized memory. This **will** leak passwords, encryption keys and other
|
---|
250 | kinds of sensitive information. (Information leak)
|
---|
251 | - Force the program to allocate a large amount of memory. For example, when specifying
|
---|
252 | `500000000` as the input value, each request will allocate 500MB of memory.
|
---|
253 | This can be used to either exhaust the memory available of a program completely
|
---|
254 | and make it crash, or slow it down significantly. (Denial of Service)
|
---|
255 |
|
---|
256 | Both of these scenarios are considered serious security issues in a real-world
|
---|
257 | web server context.
|
---|
258 |
|
---|
259 | when using `Buffer.from(req.body.string)` instead, passing a number will always
|
---|
260 | throw an exception instead, giving a controlled behaviour that can always be
|
---|
261 | handled by the program.
|
---|
262 |
|
---|
263 | <a id="ecosystem-usage"></a>
|
---|
264 | ### The `Buffer()` constructor has been deprecated for a while. Is this really an issue?
|
---|
265 |
|
---|
266 | Surveys of code in the `npm` ecosystem have shown that the `Buffer()` constructor is still
|
---|
267 | widely used. This includes new code, and overall usage of such code has actually been
|
---|
268 | *increasing*.
|
---|