Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
141 lines (114 loc) · 149 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

141 lines (114 loc) · 149 KB

Deep Security Analysis of Mongoose Networking Library

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective:

The objective of this deep security analysis is to thoroughly examine the Mongoose networking library's key components, identify potential security vulnerabilities, assess their impact, and propose actionable mitigation strategies. The analysis will focus on the library's architecture, data flow, and security controls, considering its intended use in embedded systems and resource-constrained environments. The key components to be analyzed are:

  • API: The public interface exposed to developers.
  • HTTP Server/Client: The HTTP protocol implementation.
  • MQTT Client: The MQTT protocol implementation.
  • WebSocket Server/Client: The WebSocket protocol implementation.
  • Core Networking: The core socket management and event handling.
  • TLS/SSL: The TLS/SSL implementation.
  • OS Abstraction Layer: The interface with the underlying operating system.

Scope:

This analysis covers the Mongoose library itself, as described in the provided security design review and inferred from its GitHub repository (https://github.com/cesanta/mongoose). It does not cover the security of external systems (e.g., MQTT brokers, web servers) that Mongoose might interact with, nor does it cover application-specific security vulnerabilities in code that uses Mongoose. It focuses on the statically linked deployment model, as chosen in the design review.

Methodology:

  1. Architecture and Data Flow Inference: Based on the provided C4 diagrams, documentation, and (hypothetically) examining the codebase, we infer the architecture, data flow, and interactions between components.
  2. Component-Specific Threat Modeling: For each key component, we identify potential threats based on common attack patterns, known vulnerabilities in similar software, and the specific context of Mongoose.
  3. Security Control Analysis: We evaluate the effectiveness of existing security controls and identify gaps.
  4. Mitigation Strategy Recommendation: For each identified threat, we propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies tailored to Mongoose and its intended use. These strategies will prioritize practical implementation within the constraints of embedded systems.
  5. Risk Assessment: We categorize the severity and likelihood of each threat, considering the mitigating factors.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

This section breaks down the security implications of each key component, identifies potential threats, and proposes mitigation strategies.

2.1 API

  • Security Implications: The API is the primary entry point for developers, and its design significantly impacts the overall security of applications using Mongoose. Poorly designed APIs can lead to misuse and vulnerabilities.
  • Potential Threats:
    • T1: Insecure Default Configurations: If the API defaults to insecure settings (e.g., weak TLS configurations, disabled authentication), developers might unknowingly deploy vulnerable applications.
    • T2: Lack of Input Validation: Insufficient validation of user-provided data passed to API functions can lead to various injection attacks.
    • T3: Insufficient Error Handling: Poor error handling can leak sensitive information or lead to denial-of-service.
    • T4: Lack of Rate Limiting/Throttling: The API might be vulnerable to denial-of-service attacks if it doesn't limit the rate of requests.
    • T5: Unclear Documentation: Ambiguous or incomplete documentation can lead to developers misusing the API and introducing vulnerabilities.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M1 (T1): Default to the most secure configurations possible. Require explicit configuration for less secure options. Provide clear warnings in the documentation about the security implications of different settings.
    • M2 (T2): Implement rigorous input validation for all API functions. Use a whitelist approach whenever possible. Provide helper functions for common validation tasks (e.g., validating URLs, email addresses). Sanitize all input before passing it to lower-level components.
    • M3 (T3): Implement robust error handling that does not reveal sensitive information to the client. Return generic error codes and log detailed error information internally. Ensure that errors do not leave the system in an unstable or insecure state.
    • M4 (T4): Implement rate limiting and throttling mechanisms to prevent abuse and denial-of-service attacks. Allow developers to configure these limits based on their application's needs.
    • M5 (T5): Provide comprehensive and clear documentation that includes security best practices, examples of secure usage, and explanations of potential risks.

2.2 HTTP Server/Client

  • Security Implications: The HTTP implementation is a complex component with a large attack surface. Vulnerabilities in HTTP handling can lead to various attacks, including cross-site scripting (XSS), request smuggling, and header injection.
  • Potential Threats:
    • T6: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): If the server doesn't properly sanitize user-provided data before including it in HTTP responses, attackers can inject malicious scripts.
    • T7: HTTP Request Smuggling: Ambiguities in parsing HTTP requests can lead to request smuggling attacks, where attackers can bypass security controls or access unauthorized resources.
    • T8: Header Injection: If the server doesn't properly validate HTTP headers, attackers can inject malicious headers, potentially leading to various attacks, including session hijacking and cache poisoning.
    • T9: Denial-of-Service (DoS): The server might be vulnerable to DoS attacks targeting specific HTTP features (e.g., slowloris, resource exhaustion).
    • T10: Information Disclosure: Improperly configured error messages or server headers can reveal sensitive information about the server's configuration or internal workings.
    • T11: Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards: If redirects and forwards are not validated, attackers can redirect users to malicious sites.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M6 (T6): Strictly validate and sanitize all user-provided data before including it in HTTP responses. Use output encoding appropriate for the context (e.g., HTML encoding, JavaScript encoding). Consider implementing a Content Security Policy (CSP) to mitigate the impact of XSS vulnerabilities.
    • M7 (T7): Adhere strictly to the HTTP specification (RFCs) when parsing requests. Use a robust and well-tested HTTP parser. Reject ambiguous requests. Consider using a web application firewall (WAF) to detect and block request smuggling attempts (although this is often outside the scope of the library itself, it's a relevant consideration for deployment).
    • M8 (T8): Validate all HTTP headers against a whitelist of allowed headers and their expected formats. Reject requests with invalid or unexpected headers.
    • M9 (T9): Implement resource limits and timeouts to prevent DoS attacks. Consider using techniques like connection limiting, request queuing, and graceful degradation. Specifically address slowloris attacks by setting appropriate timeouts for reading request headers and bodies.
    • M10 (T10): Configure the server to return generic error messages that do not reveal sensitive information. Disable or customize server headers that reveal unnecessary details about the server's software or configuration (e.g., the Server header).
    • M11 (T11): Validate all URLs used in redirects and forwards. Ensure they are within the expected domain or a list of allowed domains.

2.3 MQTT Client

  • Security Implications: The MQTT client's security depends on secure authentication with the broker, proper topic authorization, and secure communication (TLS).
  • Potential Threats:
    • T12: Weak Authentication: Using weak or default credentials to connect to the MQTT broker can allow attackers to gain access to the MQTT network.
    • T13: Insufficient Authorization: If the MQTT broker doesn't enforce proper topic-level authorization, clients might be able to publish or subscribe to topics they shouldn't have access to.
    • T14: Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: Without TLS encryption, attackers can intercept and modify MQTT messages.
    • T15: Denial-of-Service (DoS): Attackers can flood the MQTT broker with messages, potentially disrupting communication for legitimate clients.
    • T16: Malformed MQTT Packets: Specially crafted MQTT packets could exploit vulnerabilities in the client's parsing logic.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M12 (T12): Support strong authentication mechanisms, such as username/password authentication with secure password storage (e.g., hashing) and client certificate authentication. Encourage users to use strong, unique credentials. Provide mechanisms for securely storing and managing credentials.
    • M13 (T13): This is primarily the responsibility of the MQTT broker, but the Mongoose client should provide mechanisms for specifying the topics to which the client intends to publish and subscribe. This information can be used by the broker to enforce authorization policies.
    • M14 (T14): Require TLS encryption for all MQTT connections by default. Provide options for configuring TLS settings, including certificate verification and cipher suite selection.
    • M15 (T15): This is primarily the responsibility of the MQTT broker. However, the Mongoose client should implement reasonable timeouts and error handling to prevent it from being overwhelmed by a flood of messages.
    • M16 (T16): Thoroughly validate all incoming MQTT packets according to the MQTT specification. Use fuzz testing to identify potential vulnerabilities in the packet parsing logic.

2.4 WebSocket Server/Client

  • Security Implications: WebSockets maintain persistent connections, making them a potential target for attacks. Secure handshakes and proper data handling are crucial.
  • Potential Threats:
    • T17: Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking (CSWSH): Attackers can hijack WebSocket connections if the server doesn't properly validate the origin of the connection request.
    • T18: Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: Without TLS encryption, attackers can intercept and modify WebSocket messages.
    • T19: Denial-of-Service (DoS): Attackers can exhaust server resources by opening a large number of WebSocket connections or sending large messages.
    • T20: Data Injection: If the server doesn't properly validate data received over WebSocket connections, attackers can inject malicious data.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M17 (T17): Strictly validate the Origin header during the WebSocket handshake to ensure that the connection request is coming from a trusted origin. Consider using other cross-origin resource sharing (CORS) mechanisms.
    • M18 (T18): Require TLS encryption for all WebSocket connections by default. Provide options for configuring TLS settings.
    • M19 (T19): Implement resource limits and timeouts to prevent DoS attacks. Limit the number of concurrent WebSocket connections per client and the maximum message size.
    • M20 (T19): Strictly validate all data received over WebSocket connections according to the expected format and content. Use a whitelist approach whenever possible.

2.5 Core Networking

  • Security Implications: This component handles low-level network operations, making it a critical security chokepoint. Vulnerabilities here can have widespread consequences.
  • Potential Threats:
    • T21: Buffer Overflows: Incorrect handling of network buffers can lead to buffer overflows, potentially allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code.
    • T22: Integer Overflows: Arithmetic errors in handling network data sizes or lengths can lead to integer overflows, potentially leading to buffer overflows or other vulnerabilities.
    • T23: Resource Exhaustion: Poor resource management (e.g., not closing sockets properly) can lead to resource exhaustion, causing denial-of-service.
    • T24: Timing Attacks: Variations in the time it takes to perform certain network operations could leak sensitive information.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M21 (T21): Use safe string and buffer handling functions (e.g., strlcpy, strlcat, bounded memcpy). Always check buffer boundaries before writing data. Use dynamic memory allocation carefully and free memory when it's no longer needed. Employ Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) and Data Execution Prevention (DEP)/No-eXecute (NX) at the OS level.
    • M22 (T22): Use safe integer arithmetic functions or libraries that detect and prevent integer overflows. Carefully check the results of arithmetic operations involving network data sizes or lengths.
    • M23 (T23): Ensure that all network resources (e.g., sockets, file descriptors) are properly closed when they are no longer needed. Use resource limits to prevent a single application from consuming excessive resources.
    • M24 (T24): This is a complex issue that is often difficult to address completely. However, where possible, try to design network operations to take a constant amount of time, regardless of the input data. This is particularly important for cryptographic operations.

2.6 TLS/SSL

  • Security Implications: TLS/SSL is crucial for securing network communication. Proper configuration and use of strong cryptographic algorithms are essential.
  • Potential Threats:
    • T25: Weak Ciphers/Protocols: Using outdated or weak TLS versions or cipher suites can allow attackers to decrypt or tamper with network traffic.
    • T26: Certificate Validation Failures: If the client doesn't properly validate server certificates, attackers can impersonate legitimate servers (MitM attacks).
    • T27: Key Management Issues: If cryptographic keys are not generated, stored, and managed securely, attackers can compromise the security of TLS.
    • T28: Side-Channel Attacks: Vulnerabilities in the TLS implementation itself (e.g., timing attacks, padding oracle attacks) could allow attackers to recover cryptographic keys.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M25 (T25): Support only up-to-date TLS versions (TLS 1.2 and 1.3) and strong cipher suites. Provide options for configuring TLS settings, but default to secure configurations. Regularly update the list of supported cipher suites to remove weak or deprecated options.
    • M26 (T26): Implement strict certificate validation, including checking the certificate's validity period, revocation status (using OCSP or CRLs), and trust chain. Reject connections with invalid or untrusted certificates. Provide clear error messages to the user when certificate validation fails.
    • M27 (T27): Use a secure random number generator (RNG) to generate cryptographic keys. Store keys securely, protecting them from unauthorized access. Follow best practices for key management, including key rotation and secure key exchange. If possible, integrate with hardware security modules (HSMs) for key storage and management.
    • M28 (T28): Use a well-vetted and regularly updated TLS library (e.g., mbed TLS, OpenSSL). Stay informed about known vulnerabilities in TLS implementations and apply patches promptly. Consider using constant-time cryptographic implementations to mitigate timing attacks.

2.7 OS Abstraction Layer

  • Security Implications: This layer interacts directly with the operating system, making it a potential source of vulnerabilities if not implemented securely.
  • Potential Threats:
    • T29: Platform-Specific Vulnerabilities: Exploiting vulnerabilities in the underlying operating system's networking stack.
    • T30: Insecure System Calls: Using system calls insecurely can lead to various vulnerabilities, including privilege escalation and information disclosure.
    • T31: Improper Handling of OS Resources: Incorrectly managing OS resources (e.g., file descriptors, memory) can lead to resource exhaustion or other vulnerabilities.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • M29 (T29): Keep the underlying operating system and its networking stack up-to-date with the latest security patches. Use a minimal set of OS features to reduce the attack surface.
    • M30 (T30): Use system calls carefully and securely, following best practices for each platform. Validate all input to system calls. Avoid using deprecated or insecure system calls.
    • M31 (T31): Properly manage OS resources, ensuring that they are allocated and released correctly. Use resource limits to prevent a single application from consuming excessive resources.

3. Risk Assessment

The following table summarizes the identified threats, their likelihood, impact, and overall risk level, considering the proposed mitigation strategies.

| Threat ID | Threat Description | Likelihood | Impact | Risk Level | Mitigations