
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
This isn't a story about NPM even though it's inspired by NPM. Twice. The maintainer of the "colors" NPM library intentionally changed the library's behavior from its expected functionality to printing garbage messages. The library was exhibiting the type of malicious activity that typically comes from a compromised package. Only this time users of the library, which easily number in the thousands, discovered this was sabotage by the package maintainer himself. This opens up a broader discussion on supply chain security than just provenance. How do we ensure open source tools receive the investments they need -- security or otherwise? For that matter, how do we ensure internal tools receive the investments they need? Log4j was just one recent example of seeing old code appear in surprising places.
Segment resources
- https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/dev-corrupts-npm-libs-colors-and-faker-breaking-thousands-of-apps/
- https://www.zdnet.com/article/when-open-source-developers-go-bad/
- https://www.zdnet.com/article/log4j-after-white-house-meeting-google-calls-for-list-of-critical-open-source-projects/
- https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/17/open_source_closed_wallets_big/
- https://blog.google/technology/safety-security/making-open-source-software-safer-and-more-secure/
- https://docs.linuxfoundation.org/lfx/security/onboarding-your-project
- https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/rage-quit-coder-unpublished-17-lines-of-javascript-and-broke-the-internet/
Visit https://www.securityweekly.com/asw for all the latest episodes!
Show Notes: https://securityweekly.com/asw180
4.8
44 ratings
This isn't a story about NPM even though it's inspired by NPM. Twice. The maintainer of the "colors" NPM library intentionally changed the library's behavior from its expected functionality to printing garbage messages. The library was exhibiting the type of malicious activity that typically comes from a compromised package. Only this time users of the library, which easily number in the thousands, discovered this was sabotage by the package maintainer himself. This opens up a broader discussion on supply chain security than just provenance. How do we ensure open source tools receive the investments they need -- security or otherwise? For that matter, how do we ensure internal tools receive the investments they need? Log4j was just one recent example of seeing old code appear in surprising places.
Segment resources
- https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/dev-corrupts-npm-libs-colors-and-faker-breaking-thousands-of-apps/
- https://www.zdnet.com/article/when-open-source-developers-go-bad/
- https://www.zdnet.com/article/log4j-after-white-house-meeting-google-calls-for-list-of-critical-open-source-projects/
- https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/17/open_source_closed_wallets_big/
- https://blog.google/technology/safety-security/making-open-source-software-safer-and-more-secure/
- https://docs.linuxfoundation.org/lfx/security/onboarding-your-project
- https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/rage-quit-coder-unpublished-17-lines-of-javascript-and-broke-the-internet/
Visit https://www.securityweekly.com/asw for all the latest episodes!
Show Notes: https://securityweekly.com/asw180
1,965 Listeners
206 Listeners
360 Listeners
628 Listeners
285 Listeners
31,928 Listeners
6,279 Listeners
2,093 Listeners
1,012 Listeners
36 Listeners
7,842 Listeners
180 Listeners
311 Listeners
135 Listeners
55 Listeners