Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
127 lines (109 loc) · 15 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

127 lines (109 loc) · 15 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for espressif/esp-idf

Objective: To gain unauthorized control of the ESP-IDF based application and/or exfiltrate sensitive data by exploiting vulnerabilities inherent in the ESP-IDF framework or its common usage patterns, focusing on the most critical and easily exploitable paths.

Attack Tree Visualization

Attack Goal: Compromise ESP-IDF Application

└───[OR]─ Network Exploitation
    └───[OR]─ Wi-Fi Network Attacks (Common ESP-IDF Use Case)
        ├─── [CRITICAL NODE: WPS Vulnerabilities] WPS Vulnerabilities (If Enabled) **[CRITICAL NODE]**
        │   └─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Brute-force WPS PIN, gain network access **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**
        └─── [CRITICAL NODE: Insecure Wi-Fi Configuration] Insecure Wi-Fi Configuration **[CRITICAL NODE]**
            └─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Weak Passphrase **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**

└───[OR]─ Physical Access Exploitation
    └───[OR]─ [CRITICAL NODE: Serial/JTAG Debug Interfaces] Serial/JTAG Debug Interfaces **[CRITICAL NODE]**
        ├─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Unsecured Debug Interfaces Enabled in Production **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**
        ├─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Firmware Extraction via Debug Interfaces **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**
        └─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Firmware Flashing via Debug Interfaces **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**

└───[OR]─ Software/Firmware Exploitation (Vulnerabilities in ESP-IDF or Application Code)
    └───[OR]─ [CRITICAL NODE: Application Code Vulnerabilities] Application Code Vulnerabilities (Leveraging ESP-IDF) **[CRITICAL NODE]**
        ├─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Buffer Overflows in Application Code (Using ESP-IDF APIs) **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**
        └─── [HIGH-RISK PATH] Insecure Data Handling in Application (Using ESP-IDF Storage) **[HIGH-RISK PATH]**

Attack Tree Path: Critical Node: WPS Vulnerabilities (If Enabled)

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Brute-force WPS PIN, gain network access
    • Description: Wi-Fi Protected Setup (WPS) using PIN method is vulnerable to brute-force attacks. Attackers can use readily available tools to repeatedly try PIN combinations. Due to design flaws in WPS, the PIN space is effectively reduced, making brute-forcing feasible within a reasonable timeframe.
    • Likelihood: Medium - WPS is often enabled by default on Wi-Fi access points and may be inadvertently left enabled in deployments using ESP-IDF devices.
    • Impact: High - Successful WPS brute-force grants the attacker full access to the Wi-Fi network, bypassing Wi-Fi encryption (WPA2/WPA3). This allows network traffic interception, Man-in-the-Middle attacks, and direct access to the ESP-IDF device and other devices on the network.
    • Effort: Low - Tools for WPS brute-forcing are readily available and easy to use, often automated.
    • Skill Level: Low - Requires minimal technical skill, just the ability to use readily available tools.
    • Detection Difficulty: Low - WPS brute-force attempts can sometimes be logged by access points, but successful access is indistinguishable from legitimate connections.
    • Mitigation: Disable WPS entirely. This is the most effective mitigation. If WPS is absolutely required (highly discouraged), use the Push-Button Configuration (PBC) method instead of PIN, although PBC also has its own, albeit less severe, vulnerabilities.

Attack Tree Path: Critical Node: Insecure Wi-Fi Configuration

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Weak Passphrase
    • Description: Using a weak or easily guessable Wi-Fi passphrase makes the Wi-Fi network vulnerable to brute-force or dictionary attacks. Attackers can capture Wi-Fi handshakes and use powerful computers or cloud services to crack weak passphrases offline.
    • Likelihood: Medium - Users often choose weak passphrases for convenience or lack of awareness.
    • Impact: High - Compromising the Wi-Fi passphrase grants the attacker full access to the Wi-Fi network, similar to WPS exploitation. This allows network traffic interception, Man-in-the-Middle attacks, and direct access to the ESP-IDF device and other devices on the network.
    • Effort: Medium - Requires computational resources for brute-forcing, but readily available tools and cloud services can be used.
    • Skill Level: Low - Basic tool usage and understanding of Wi-Fi security.
    • Detection Difficulty: Low - Brute-force attempts can be logged, but successful access is hard to distinguish from legitimate connections.
    • Mitigation: Enforce strong Wi-Fi passphrases. Use passphrases that are long, complex (mix of uppercase, lowercase, numbers, and symbols), and unique. Educate users about the importance of strong passphrases. Consider using WPA3 for enhanced security if supported by both the ESP-IDF device and the access point.

Attack Tree Path: Critical Node: Serial/JTAG Debug Interfaces

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Unsecured Debug Interfaces Enabled in Production

    • Description: Leaving debug interfaces (UART, JTAG) enabled and unsecured in production firmware creates a direct physical access vulnerability. An attacker with physical access to the device can connect to these interfaces and gain control.
    • Likelihood: Medium - Debug interfaces are often enabled during development and may be inadvertently left enabled in production deployments, especially in rushed projects or when security is not prioritized.
    • Impact: High - Unsecured debug interfaces provide a backdoor for attackers. They can be used to:
      • Gain shell access: UART often provides a command-line interface to the device's operating system or application.
      • Extract firmware: JTAG and UART can be used to dump the entire firmware from the device's flash memory.
      • Flash malicious firmware: JTAG and UART can be used to overwrite the device's firmware with malicious code.
      • Bypass security features: Debug interfaces often bypass normal security checks and authentication mechanisms.
    • Effort: Low - Requires physical access and standard debug tools (e.g., JTAG debugger, serial terminal).
    • Skill Level: Low - Basic hardware and debug interface knowledge.
    • Detection Difficulty: Low - Physical access is often obvious, but remote detection of enabled debug interfaces is harder without physical probing.
    • Mitigation: Disable or strongly secure debug interfaces in production firmware.
      • Disable: The most secure option is to completely disable debug interfaces in production builds.
      • Secure: If debug interfaces are needed for firmware updates or diagnostics in the field, implement strong authentication and authorization mechanisms to control access. Consider physical security measures to restrict access to debug ports. In some cases, physically disabling debug pins by cutting traces or using fuses might be an option for extreme security requirements.

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Firmware Extraction via Debug Interfaces

    • Description: If debug interfaces are accessible (as described above), attackers can easily extract the device's firmware.
    • Likelihood: High (if debug interfaces are accessible)
    • Impact: High - Firmware extraction allows attackers to:
      • Reverse engineer the firmware: Analyze the code to find vulnerabilities, understand application logic, and identify sensitive data or algorithms.
      • Clone devices: Replicate the firmware and potentially create counterfeit devices.
      • Steal intellectual property: Extract proprietary algorithms, configurations, or data embedded in the firmware.
    • Effort: Low - Standard debug tools and readily available techniques.
    • Skill Level: Low - Basic debug interface knowledge.
    • Detection Difficulty: Low - Firmware extraction itself is silent and difficult to detect remotely. Physical access is the primary indicator.
    • Mitigation: Primarily mitigated by securing debug interfaces as described above. Firmware encryption at rest can make extracted firmware harder to analyze, but it doesn't prevent extraction itself.

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Firmware Flashing via Debug Interfaces

    • Description: If debug interfaces are accessible, attackers can easily flash malicious firmware onto the device.
    • Likelihood: High (if debug interfaces are accessible)
    • Impact: High - Firmware flashing allows attackers to:
      • Completely compromise the device: Replace the legitimate firmware with malware, backdoors, or firmware designed to perform malicious actions.
      • Gain persistent control: Malicious firmware can be designed to survive device reboots and factory resets (unless secure boot mechanisms are in place and properly configured).
      • Cause widespread damage: If many devices are compromised, attackers can launch large-scale attacks or create botnets.
    • Effort: Low - Standard debug tools and readily available techniques.
    • Skill Level: Low - Basic debug interface knowledge.
    • Detection Difficulty: Low - Firmware flashing itself is silent. Device behavior will change after flashing, but this might be attributed to malfunctions if the malicious firmware is designed to be somewhat stealthy initially.
    • Mitigation: Primarily mitigated by securing debug interfaces. Implement and properly configure ESP-IDF Secure Boot. Secure Boot verifies the authenticity of the firmware before booting, preventing unauthorized firmware from running.

Attack Tree Path: Critical Node: Application Code Vulnerabilities (Leveraging ESP-IDF)

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Buffer Overflows in Application Code (Using ESP-IDF APIs)

    • Description: Buffer overflows occur when application code writes data beyond the allocated buffer size. This is a common programming error, especially in C/C++ languages often used with ESP-IDF. Incorrect usage of ESP-IDF APIs for string handling, data processing, or network communication can easily introduce buffer overflows.
    • Likelihood: Medium - Buffer overflows are a common vulnerability type, especially in embedded systems where memory management is often manual and error-prone. Developers may make mistakes when using ESP-IDF APIs if they are not careful about input validation and buffer sizes.
    • Impact: High - Buffer overflows can lead to:
      • Remote Code Execution (RCE): Attackers can overwrite critical memory regions, including the program's instruction pointer, to hijack control flow and execute arbitrary code on the device.
      • Denial of Service (DoS): Buffer overflows can cause crashes and device instability.
      • Information Disclosure: In some cases, buffer overflows can be exploited to leak sensitive data from memory.
    • Effort: Low - Simple coding errors can introduce buffer overflows. Exploiting them might require more effort depending on the specific vulnerability and target architecture.
    • Skill Level: Low - Basic programming knowledge, but lack of secure coding practices. Exploiting buffer overflows can require medium to high skill depending on complexity.
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium - Static analysis tools, code reviews, and fuzzing can detect many buffer overflows. Runtime detection can be more challenging without proper memory protection mechanisms.
    • Mitigation: Implement secure coding practices:
      • Input Validation: Always validate the size and format of external inputs before processing them.
      • Safe String Handling: Use safe string handling functions (e.g., strncpy, snprintf, ESP-IDF's esp_err_to_name for error strings) that prevent buffer overflows.
      • Bounds Checking: Perform bounds checking on array and buffer accesses.
      • Memory-Safe Libraries: Consider using memory-safe libraries or languages where possible.
      • Code Reviews: Conduct thorough code reviews to identify potential buffer overflow vulnerabilities.
      • Static Analysis: Use static analysis tools to automatically detect potential buffer overflows in the code.
      • Fuzzing: Use fuzzing techniques to test the application with a wide range of inputs and identify buffer overflows and other vulnerabilities.

  • Attack Vector (High-Risk Path): Insecure Data Handling in Application (Using ESP-IDF Storage)

    • Description: Applications often need to store sensitive data (credentials, configuration, user data) in non-volatile storage (flash memory) using ESP-IDF storage APIs. If this data is stored insecurely (e.g., in plaintext, without proper access controls), it becomes vulnerable to unauthorized access.
    • Likelihood: Medium - Developers may overlook secure storage practices, especially in embedded systems where security might be an afterthought or perceived as less critical.
    • Impact: Medium - Insecure data handling can lead to:
      • Data Exposure: Sensitive data can be read by attackers who gain access to the device (physically or remotely).
      • Credential Theft: Stored credentials (passwords, API keys) can be stolen and used to compromise other systems or accounts.
      • Privacy Violations: Exposure of user data can lead to privacy breaches and legal liabilities.
    • Effort: Low - Simple to check for plaintext storage in firmware images or by accessing the device's storage if physical access is gained.
    • Skill Level: Low - Basic understanding of data storage and security.
    • Detection Difficulty: Low - Code reviews, static analysis, and physical inspection of storage can easily reveal insecure data handling practices.
    • Mitigation: Implement secure data handling practices:
      • Encryption: Encrypt sensitive data before storing it in flash or other storage. Use strong encryption algorithms and proper key management. ESP-IDF provides features for secure storage and encryption.
      • Access Control: Implement access control mechanisms to restrict access to sensitive data to only authorized parts of the application.
      • Secure Storage APIs: Utilize ESP-IDF's secure storage APIs and features designed for storing sensitive data securely.
      • Least Privilege: Follow the principle of least privilege and only store the minimum necessary sensitive data. Avoid storing sensitive data if it's not absolutely required.
      • Regular Security Audits: Conduct regular security audits to review data handling practices and identify potential vulnerabilities.