this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
107 points (99.1% liked)
chat
8174 readers
394 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes. Video decoders are complex software and ffmpeg has a long history of security patches. If those are the bugs we caught, what's left?
Not really except that tankietube is probably more of a target than random anime pirates. But comrades, if you have a need for decent opsec, don't be sailing the high seas.
This seems more like the sort of thing to run on something you can periodically nuke, and maybe put behind an external firewall that only allows communication with the tankietube servers. Maybe some comrades have spare credit on a cloud provider that would be suited for this.
This is a great idea but unfortunately security is always a concern.
edit: sorry if you got hit with a bunch of notifications, the reply was silently failing and I didn't know what was going on so I retried oops
I think it is worth further research, at least. Setting aside potential exploits in ffmpeg, containerization (if not virtualization) seems necessary. A process running as root in a Docker container effectively has root access to the host, but a properly designed container should run all the work as non-privileged users. This work can be isolated using the cgroups APIs (docker should manage this, I think) and potentially reinforced with SELinux policies. Done correctly, this would effectively limit the impact of remote code execution in ffmpeg to denial of service. The attack surface for privilege escalation would then be limited to the Linux syscall API, utilities with the setuid flag, etc (highly, highly audited stuff that would allow you to root any machine if it were broken).
Alternately, it might be worth looking at bubblewrap, which is the basis of FlatPak containerization.
What is the threat model? The TankieTube server sends a malicious MP4 to the remote runner machine? Or a malicious remote runner sends a malicious MP4 to the server?
The former is easy to avoid by me not being evil. The latter is only a security concern for the TankieTube server, not the contributors.
Hostile user uploads a malicious video file, peertube instance sends it to a volunteer for transcoding, RCE occurs on volunteer's machine.
So the concern is that a volunteer could have a more vulnerable installation of ffmpeg compared to the local server? How does that happen?
I think most prospective volunteers just want ffmpeg to run in a secure context without root, and stronger vouching of security by multiple knowledgeable users. The specifics of ffmpeg having vulnerabilities is not that important.
Do you vet all videos uploaded? I thought anyone could upload files to tankietube.
Yes. Anyone can upload, and videos are published automatically. I review the videos every day that have been published recently. I also rely on user reports.