GodotSharp

Problem

Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) are structured addresses that point to locations and assets on the internet. URLs allow software developers to build complex applications that exchange data with servers that can be hosted in multiple geographical regions. URLs can commonly be found embedded in documentation, configuration files, source code and compiled binaries. One or more embedded URLs were discovered to link to raw files hosted on GitHub. Attackers often abuse popular web services to host malicious payloads. Since code-sharing services URLs are typically allowed by security solutions, using them for payload delivery increases the odds that the malicious code will reach the user. While the presence of code-sharing service locations does not imply malicious intent, all of their uses in a software package should be documented and approved. An increasing number of software supply chain attacks in the open source space leverages the GitHub service to deliver malicious payloads.

Problem

Applications communicate with web services by exchanging HTTP requests. During software development, externally hosted services are used by developers to debug software quality issues relating to exchanging HTTP requests. Attackers commonly abuse tools designed for HTTP request inspection to monitor network traffic and extract sensitive information from the HTTP traffic. While the presence of domains related to HTTP inspection does not imply malicious intent, all of their uses in a software package should be documented and approved. Attackers might have purposely injected security testing tools in the software package to monitor the network traffic of the infected computer system. It is also possible that the software package has mistakenly included a part of its testing infrastructure during packaging.

Problem

Software components contain executable code that performs actions implemented during its development. These actions are called behaviors. In the analysis report, behaviors are presented as human-readable descriptions that best match the underlying code intent. While most behaviors are benign, some are commonly abused by malicious software with the intent to cause harm. When a software package shares behavior traits with malicious software, it may become flagged by security solutions. Any detection from security solutions can cause friction for the end-users during software deployment. While the behavior is likely intended by the developer, there is a small chance this detection is true positive, and an early indication of a software supply chain attack.

Problem

Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) are structured addresses that point to locations and assets on the internet. URLs allow software developers to build complex applications that exchange data with servers that can be hosted in multiple geographical regions. URLs can commonly be found embedded in documentation, configuration files, source code and compiled binaries. Top-level domains (TLD) are a part of the Domain Name System (DNS), and are used to lookup an Internet Protocol (IP) address of a requested website. There are a few different types of top-level domains. Generic, sponsored and country-code TLDs are generally accessible to the public. Registrars that govern the assignment of domain names within the TLD may choose to sell specific domain names to an interested party. However, some registrars are known to have less strict rules for assigning domain names. Attackers often abuse gaps in governance and actively seek to register their malicious domains in such TLDs. This issue is raised for all domains registered within TLDs that harbor an excessive number of malicious sites. While the presence of suspicious TLDs does not imply malicious intent, all of its uses in a software package should be documented and approved.

Problem

Digital signatures are applied to applications, packages and documents as a cryptographically secured authenticity record. Signatures verify the origin and the integrity of the object they apply to. The integrity validation relies on the cryptographic strength of the encryption and the hash verification algorithm. If either of the two is considered weak by current standards, there is a chance the signed object could be maliciously modified, without triggering the integrity failure check.