| layout | title | ref | framework | rating | description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
post |
NSSecureCoding |
Foundation |
6.0 |
A short post for this week: everything you need to know about NSSecureCoding. |
A short post for this week: everything you need to know about NSSecureCoding.
NSSecureCoding is a protocol introduced in the iOS 6 / Mac OS X 10.8 SDKs. Aside from a few mentions at WWDC, NSSecureCoding remains relatively obscure—most developers have perhaps heard of it, but perhaps never went so far as to look up what it does.
NSSecureCoding extends the NSCoding protocol by adding the class method:
+ (BOOL)supportsSecureCoding;
By conforming to NSSecureCoding and returning YES for +supportsSecureCoding, a class declares that it handles encoding and decoding of instances of itself in a way that guards against substitution attacks.
Specifically, classes that override -initWithCoder and conform to NSSecureCoding should use -decodeObjectOfClass:forKey: rather than -decodeObjectForKey:.
Why is this important? Recall that NSCoding is Foundation's way of marshaling objects to be either archived on a file system, or copied to another address space. When -decodeObjectForKey: is used to decode representations of objects into actual objects, there is no guarantee that the result of creating the object will be what was expected. If that representation is corrupted—specifically, in changing the target class (and thus designated initializer)—the application runs the risk of constructing unknown objects. Whether by malicious intent or an incidental coding error, this can cause serious problems.
It's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but it's somewhat similar to recent YAML exploit found in Rails.
For an XPC service, which is designed with security in mind, data integrity of this nature is especially important. It's a safe bet that XPC will only wax influence in subsequent iOS and OS X releases, so it's good to keep this all in mind.
Anyway, NSSecureCoding patches this vulnerability by establishing a contract for best practices. Now, decoding an object requires the class to be known ahead of time.
Whereas a standard, secure implementation of -initWithCoder: might have a check like:
id obj = [decoder decodeObjectForKey:@"myKey"];
if (![obj isKindOfClass:[MyClass class]]) {
// fail
}
...an NSSecureCoding-conforming class would use:
id obj = [decoder decodeObjectOfClass:[MyClass class]
forKey:@"myKey"];
Sometimes, a little API change makes all of the difference.
So now you know what's up with NSSecureCoding. Keep an eye out for that going forward: XPC is only going to become more important. Perhaps not today, perhaps not tomorrow, but someday—you will probably need to implement NSSecureCoding. And when that day comes... you'll be ready.
Stay safe, everyone.