Skip to content

Add Japanese security/performance audit report and stabilize existing security PoC#129

Merged
harumaki4649 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
copilot/scan-vulnerabilities-report
Mar 9, 2026
Merged

Add Japanese security/performance audit report and stabilize existing security PoC#129
harumaki4649 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
copilot/scan-vulnerabilities-report

Conversation

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI commented Mar 9, 2026

This PR adds a scan-oriented Japanese audit report covering current security posture, existing PoC evidence, and low-risk performance opportunities, with recommendations biased toward speed and backward compatibility. It also makes the existing SQL injection PoC usable as proof of the current fixed behavior.

  • Audit report

    • Add docs/ja/guide/security_audit.md
    • Document:
      • current findings vs. historical fixed issues
      • PoC-backed verification for table-name SQL injection and None reload integrity
      • performance opportunities that avoid breaking existing APIs
      • prioritized recommendations (P0/P1/P2) with compatibility in mind
  • Published docs

    • Add docs/site/security_audit.md
    • Link the report from:
      • docs/ja/README.md
      • VitePress sidebar in docs/site/.vitepress/config.mts
  • PoC cleanup

    • Fix etc/poc/poc_sqli.py so it no longer crashes on blocked initialization
    • Make the output explicitly show that malicious table names are rejected and the target table remains intact
  • Findings captured in the report

    • fixed historical SQL injection is still blocked by identifier sanitization
    • fixed None-value reload bug remains resolved via _NOT_FOUND
    • current hardening opportunities are operational / opt-in:
      • path trust boundary around backup() / restore()
      • async queue pressure under burst load
      • future AEAD format versioning if AAD is introduced
    • main backward-compatible perf opportunities:
      • streaming alternatives to values() / items()
      • batch_get() cache-check micro-optimization
      • batched PRAGMA setup

Example from the stabilized PoC:

db = None
try:
    malicious_table_name = "data (key TEXT PRIMARY KEY, value TEXT); DROP TABLE users; --"
    db = NanaSQLite(db_path, table=malicious_table_name)
    print("Unexpected: NanaSQLite initialized with malicious table name.")
except Exception as e:
    print(f"Error during init (this is safe): {e}")
finally:
    if db is not None:
        db.close()
Original prompt

脆弱性をスキャンと高速化の余地を知らべ脆弱性はPOCで証明してまとめてレポートして推奨対応を提案しなさい。速度と後方互換性を重視する。


💡 You can make Copilot smarter by setting up custom instructions, customizing its development environment and configuring Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. Learn more Copilot coding agent tips in the docs.

Co-authored-by: harumaki4649 <83683593+harumaki4649@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot AI changed the title [WIP] Conduct vulnerability scan and report findings Add Japanese security/performance audit report and stabilize existing security PoC Mar 9, 2026
@harumaki4649
Copy link
Contributor

@copilot ありがとう。mdの作成とかコードはこれ以上変えなくていでコメントでこの質問?に対して返信してほしい。

テーブル名チェックするようになったけど置き換え方式とかはできなかったん?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Copilot AI commented Mar 9, 2026

@copilot ありがとう。mdの作成とかコードはこれ以上変えなくていでコメントでこの質問?に対して返信してほしい。

テーブル名チェックするように�...

9c80870 の件ですが、置き換え方式にもできます。ただ今回は識別子を受ける場所なので、危険文字を別名に変換して通すより、_sanitize_identifier() で許可文字だけ通して不正入力は reject する方を選んでいます。理由は 1) 何に置き換わったか分かりづらく意図しない別テーブル名になる、2) 衝突や予期しない互換性問題が出やすい、3) 判定だけなので実装も速く単純、の3点です。もし置き換えをやるなら opt-in で safe_name = re.sub(...) みたいに別APIに切り出すのはありですが、デフォルト挙動としては reject の方が安全です。UI 変更の確認用スクリーンショット: https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8f2f15cc-e664-48a5-bfba-e51b486e6105

@harumaki4649 harumaki4649 marked this pull request as ready for review March 9, 2026 06:22
@harumaki4649 harumaki4649 merged commit 203a770 into main Mar 9, 2026
56 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants