Address HashWick #23259

hashseed · 2018-10-04T11:13:19Z

See https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/

This serves as mitigation for the so-called HashWick vulnerability. Original commit messages: commit 3833fef57368c53c6170559ffa524c8c69f16ee5 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 11:43:13 2018 Refactor integer hashing function names We now clearly differentiate between: - unseeded hash for 32-bit integers - unseeded hash for 64-bit integers - seeded hash for 32-bit integers - seeded hash for strings [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I7459958c4158ee3501c962943dff8f33258bb5ce Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235973 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56068} commit 95a979e02d7154e45b293261a6998c99d71fc238 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 14:34:48 2018 Call into C++ to compute seeded integer hash [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I8dace89d576dfcc5833fd539ce698a9ade1cb5a0 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235928 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56091} commit 2c2af0022d5feb9e525a00a76cb15db9f3e38dba Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 27 16:37:57 2018 Use 64-bit for seeded integer hashes [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: If48d1043dbe1e1bb695ec890c23e103a6cacf2d4 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1244220 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Peter Marshall <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56271} Refs: nodejs#23259

This serves as mitigation for the so-called HashWick vulnerability. Original commit messages: commit d5686a74d56fbb6985b22663ddadd66eb7b91519 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Mon Jul 16 11:19:42 2018 Extend hash seed to 64 bits [email protected], [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I5e1486ad2a42db2998d5485a0c4e711378678e6c Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1136034 Reviewed-by: Marja Hölttä <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ulan Degenbaev <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#54460} commit 3833fef57368c53c6170559ffa524c8c69f16ee5 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 11:43:13 2018 Refactor integer hashing function names We now clearly differentiate between: - unseeded hash for 32-bit integers - unseeded hash for 64-bit integers - seeded hash for 32-bit integers - seeded hash for strings [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I7459958c4158ee3501c962943dff8f33258bb5ce Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235973 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56068} commit 95a979e02d7154e45b293261a6998c99d71fc238 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 14:34:48 2018 Call into C++ to compute seeded integer hash [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I8dace89d576dfcc5833fd539ce698a9ade1cb5a0 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235928 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56091} commit 2c2af0022d5feb9e525a00a76cb15db9f3e38dba Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 27 16:37:57 2018 Use 64-bit for seeded integer hashes [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: If48d1043dbe1e1bb695ec890c23e103a6cacf2d4 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1244220 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Peter Marshall <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56271} Refs: nodejs#23259

This serves as mitigation for the so-called HashWick vulnerability. Original commit messages: commit d5686a74d56fbb6985b22663ddadd66eb7b91519 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Mon Jul 16 11:19:42 2018 Extend hash seed to 64 bits [email protected], [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I5e1486ad2a42db2998d5485a0c4e711378678e6c Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1136034 Reviewed-by: Marja Hölttä <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ulan Degenbaev <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#54460} commit 3833fef57368c53c6170559ffa524c8c69f16ee5 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 11:43:13 2018 Refactor integer hashing function names We now clearly differentiate between: - unseeded hash for 32-bit integers - unseeded hash for 64-bit integers - seeded hash for 32-bit integers - seeded hash for strings [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I7459958c4158ee3501c962943dff8f33258bb5ce Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235973 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56068} commit 95a979e02d7154e45b293261a6998c99d71fc238 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 14:34:48 2018 Call into C++ to compute seeded integer hash [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I8dace89d576dfcc5833fd539ce698a9ade1cb5a0 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235928 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56091} commit 2c2af0022d5feb9e525a00a76cb15db9f3e38dba Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 27 16:37:57 2018 Use 64-bit for seeded integer hashes [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: If48d1043dbe1e1bb695ec890c23e103a6cacf2d4 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1244220 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Peter Marshall <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56271} Refs: #23259 PR-URL: #23260 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ali Ijaz Sheikh <[email protected]>

This serves as mitigation for the so-called HashWick vulnerability. Original commit messages: commit 3833fef57368c53c6170559ffa524c8c69f16ee5 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 11:43:13 2018 Refactor integer hashing function names We now clearly differentiate between: - unseeded hash for 32-bit integers - unseeded hash for 64-bit integers - seeded hash for 32-bit integers - seeded hash for strings [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I7459958c4158ee3501c962943dff8f33258bb5ce Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235973 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56068} commit 95a979e02d7154e45b293261a6998c99d71fc238 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 14:34:48 2018 Call into C++ to compute seeded integer hash [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I8dace89d576dfcc5833fd539ce698a9ade1cb5a0 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235928 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56091} commit 2c2af0022d5feb9e525a00a76cb15db9f3e38dba Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 27 16:37:57 2018 Use 64-bit for seeded integer hashes [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: If48d1043dbe1e1bb695ec890c23e103a6cacf2d4 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1244220 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Peter Marshall <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56271} Refs: #23259 PR-URL: #23264 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ali Ijaz Sheikh <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>

This serves as mitigation for the so-called HashWick vulnerability. Original commit messages: commit d5686a74d56fbb6985b22663ddadd66eb7b91519 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Mon Jul 16 11:19:42 2018 Extend hash seed to 64 bits [email protected], [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I5e1486ad2a42db2998d5485a0c4e711378678e6c Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1136034 Reviewed-by: Marja Hölttä <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ulan Degenbaev <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#54460} commit 3833fef57368c53c6170559ffa524c8c69f16ee5 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 11:43:13 2018 Refactor integer hashing function names We now clearly differentiate between: - unseeded hash for 32-bit integers - unseeded hash for 64-bit integers - seeded hash for 32-bit integers - seeded hash for strings [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I7459958c4158ee3501c962943dff8f33258bb5ce Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235973 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56068} commit 95a979e02d7154e45b293261a6998c99d71fc238 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 14:34:48 2018 Call into C++ to compute seeded integer hash [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I8dace89d576dfcc5833fd539ce698a9ade1cb5a0 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235928 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56091} commit 2c2af0022d5feb9e525a00a76cb15db9f3e38dba Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 27 16:37:57 2018 Use 64-bit for seeded integer hashes [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: If48d1043dbe1e1bb695ec890c23e103a6cacf2d4 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1244220 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Peter Marshall <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{nodejs#56271} Refs: nodejs#23259

This serves as mitigation for the so-called HashWick vulnerability. Original commit messages: commit d5686a74d56fbb6985b22663ddadd66eb7b91519 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Mon Jul 16 11:19:42 2018 Extend hash seed to 64 bits [email protected], [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I5e1486ad2a42db2998d5485a0c4e711378678e6c Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1136034 Reviewed-by: Marja Hölttä <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ulan Degenbaev <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#54460} commit 3833fef57368c53c6170559ffa524c8c69f16ee5 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 11:43:13 2018 Refactor integer hashing function names We now clearly differentiate between: - unseeded hash for 32-bit integers - unseeded hash for 64-bit integers - seeded hash for 32-bit integers - seeded hash for strings [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I7459958c4158ee3501c962943dff8f33258bb5ce Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235973 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56068} commit 95a979e02d7154e45b293261a6998c99d71fc238 Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 20 14:34:48 2018 Call into C++ to compute seeded integer hash [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: I8dace89d576dfcc5833fd539ce698a9ade1cb5a0 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1235928 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benedikt Meurer <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56091} commit 2c2af0022d5feb9e525a00a76cb15db9f3e38dba Author: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Date: Thu Sep 27 16:37:57 2018 Use 64-bit for seeded integer hashes [email protected] Bug: chromium:680662 Change-Id: If48d1043dbe1e1bb695ec890c23e103a6cacf2d4 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1244220 Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Peter Marshall <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56271} Refs: #23259 PR-URL: #23274 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>

hashseed · 2019-02-13T06:25:38Z

I implemented siphash in V8 already and also merged the patch into node master, but am really busy these days. Can someone port this to gyp to enable it in node?

Trott · 2019-02-13T06:47:17Z

I implemented siphash in V8 already and also merged the patch into node master, but am really busy these days. Can someone port this to gyp to enable it in node?

@nodejs/node-gyp

Triggers the V8_USE_SIPHASH to switch from the internal custom V8 hash seed generation function to an implementation of SipHash. Final step needed to clear up HashWick. PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

Triggers the V8_USE_SIPHASH to switch from the internal custom V8 hash seed generation function to an implementation of SipHash. Final step needed to clear up HashWick. PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

Triggers the V8_USE_SIPHASH to switch from the internal custom V8 hash seed generation function to an implementation of SipHash. Final step needed to clear up HashWick. PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

richardlau · 2019-03-28T03:59:54Z

I believe this has now been addressed by #26367 which is active in 11.12.0. Please reopen if I am mistaken.

rvagg · 2019-03-28T23:51:51Z

I'm going to reopen this because we don't have full closure. At this stage I'd define closure as a public communication about status and impact. As far as I'm aware there are no plans for further technical changes (SipHash backport would be the only possible additional technical change but I don't believe that's practical?).

There was a conversation in private (https://github.com/nodejs-private/security/issues/198) about next steps, but that's gone stale as of a month ago so we may as well have it here.

I suggested that we formulate communication that outlined something like the following:

Node 6 won't be fixed, too old and EOL soon anyway
64-bit seeds make HashWick much less risky, but theoretically not entirely impossible to exploit. Node 8 and 10 have that.
Only Node 11+ get SipHash which makes HashWick go away (inasmuch as we can be certain about these things). Node 11 and 12 have that.
We are not aware of any practical exploit of HashWick in the wild and believe you'll be safe with just 64-bit hash seeds in Node 8 and 10. Node 12 will be an important upgrade if you are concerned about this risk and want to be as certain as we are that it's fixed.

That last point being the tricky one to communicate.

I haven't drafted anything beyond those points but if someone else wants to take this ball and draft something to post on https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/ then be my guest.

I still think the write-up I did about this is the most approachable public summary of the problem: https://nodesource.com/blog/node-js-and-the-hashwick-vulnerability/ although Fedor had some technical quibbles, see responses to https://twitter.com/NodeSource/status/1033009653062545408. This could be used as a reference to better explain the problem, along with https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/.

PR-URL: #26367 Refs: #23259 Refs: https://darksi.de/12.hashwick-v8-vulnerability/ Reviewed-By: Gus Caplan <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]>

jasnell · 2020-06-26T00:58:56Z

Ping @rvagg ... where are we at on this?

rvagg · 2020-06-26T02:14:52Z

Don't remember. Did 10.x ever get a V8 that had SipHash? Maybe not. This is for someone else to take up if they think it's still something to be concerned about (hint: it is, but it's a question of how much, SipHash just makes it slightly less practical).

hashseed added v8 engine Issues and PRs related to the V8 dependency. security Issues and PRs related to security. labels Oct 4, 2018

hashseed mentioned this issue Oct 4, 2018

[v10.x] deps: cherry-pick V8 changes to extend hash seed to 64-bit #23260

Closed

2 tasks

This was referenced Oct 4, 2018

deps: cherry-pick V8 changes to extend hash seed to 64-bit #23264

Closed

[v8.x] deps: V8: cherry-pick 64-bit hash seed commits #23274

Closed

hashseed mentioned this issue Jan 10, 2019

deps: cherry-pick c736883 from upstream V8 #25430

Closed

2 tasks

rvagg mentioned this issue Mar 1, 2019

build: enable v8's SipHash for hash seed creation #26367

Closed

richardlau closed this as completed Mar 28, 2019

rvagg reopened this Mar 28, 2019

rvagg closed this as completed Jun 26, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Address HashWick #23259

Address HashWick #23259

hashseed commented Oct 4, 2018

hashseed commented Feb 13, 2019

Trott commented Feb 13, 2019

richardlau commented Mar 28, 2019

rvagg commented Mar 28, 2019

jasnell commented Jun 26, 2020

rvagg commented Jun 26, 2020

Address HashWick #23259

Address HashWick #23259

Comments

hashseed commented Oct 4, 2018

hashseed commented Feb 13, 2019

Trott commented Feb 13, 2019

richardlau commented Mar 28, 2019

rvagg commented Mar 28, 2019

jasnell commented Jun 26, 2020

rvagg commented Jun 26, 2020