[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-1900?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Richard Zowalla closed OPENNLP-1900.
------------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
> Document and publish the OpenNLP security model
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENNLP-1900
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-1900
> Project: OpenNLP
> Issue Type: Documentation
> Reporter: Richard Zowalla
> Assignee: Richard Zowalla
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0-M6
>
> Time Spent: 2h 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Description:
> OpenNLP has no published security model. There is no SECURITY.md in the
> repository
> root or under .github/, and no equivalent section in opennlp-docs. The only
> written
> statement about input trust anywhere in the tree is a javadoc caveat on
> SvmDoccatModel.deserialize(), telling callers to invoke it only on trusted
> streams.
> This leaves the central question unanswered: is a model file
> attacker-controlled
> input? Our own record answers it both ways.
> - CVE-2026-42440 (unbounded allocation from a model stream,
> AbstractModelReader)
> was accepted and fixed.
> - CVE-2026-43825 (unsafe deserialization in SvmDoccatModel) was accepted
> and fixed.
> - OPENNLP-1891 hardened BaseModel deserialization with an ObjectInputFilter
> allowlist.
> - OPENNLP-1899 applies the MAX_ENTRIES bound to SymSpellModelSerializer.
> - Yet SvmDoccatModel's javadoc says the opposite: trusted streams only.
> In practice we behave as though models should be trusted and we harden the
> readers
> anyway. That position is defensible, but it is undocumented, so every
> incoming report
> in this class has to relitigate it from scratch. It will keep recurring:
> OpenNLP
> deserializes several independent binary formats, and each one is a candidate
> for the
> same finding.
> Scope of work:
> 1. Write a security model per the ASF guidance at
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SECURITY/Documenting+your+security+model
> 2. State explicitly whether model files, training data, and dictionaries are
> considered trusted input, and what we do nonetheless (defence in depth:
> entry
> bounds, deserialization filters, fail-fast on corrupt headers).
> 3. State what is out of scope, so reporters know in advance which findings
> will be
> treated as hardening rather than vulnerabilities.
> 4. Publish as SECURITY.md and cross-reference it from opennlp-docs and the
> project
> website.
> 5. Reconcile the SvmDoccatModel javadoc caveat with whatever position we
> land on.
> Prompted by a report forwarded from ASF Security, which noted the absence of a
> published model and pointed at the cwiki guidance.
> Two points worth deciding before writing the prose, since they shape the
> whole docum
> - What the actual position is. "Models are trusted, we harden anyway" is the
> honest ctice, but it needs a committer decision to become policy — it
> determines whether thenext report in this class gets a CVE or a "thanks,
> hardened, not a vulnerability."
> - Whether this belongs on the 3.x roadmap or is version-independent. A
> SECURITY.md ces, so it probably shouldn't carry a fix version at all.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
