Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
169 lines (138 loc) · 22.2 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

169 lines (138 loc) · 22.2 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for octalmage/robotjs

Mitigation Strategy: Input Validation and Sanitization for RobotJS Action Parameters

  • Description:

    1. Identify RobotJS action parameters from external sources: Pinpoint all instances where parameters for RobotJS functions (e.g., mouse.move, keyboard.typeString, screen.capture) are derived from external inputs such as user input, API data, or configuration files.
    2. Define valid parameter constraints: For each RobotJS action parameter, establish strict constraints based on the expected usage and security requirements. This includes:
      • Data type validation: Ensure parameters are of the correct data type (e.g., numbers for coordinates, strings for text input).
      • Range validation: Restrict numerical parameters to acceptable ranges (e.g., mouse coordinates within screen bounds, limited string lengths).
      • Format validation: Enforce specific formats for string parameters if necessary (e.g., using regular expressions to allow only alphanumeric characters).
      • Sanitization of string inputs: Escape or remove potentially harmful characters or sequences from string parameters to prevent command injection or other vulnerabilities if RobotJS actions indirectly interact with system commands.
    3. Implement validation and sanitization routines: Before passing any external input as a parameter to a RobotJS function, apply the defined validation and sanitization routines.
    4. Handle invalid parameters securely: If validation fails, reject the input, log the error, and prevent the RobotJS action from being executed. Provide informative error messages for debugging and security monitoring.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Malicious RobotJS Action Injection (High Severity): Attackers inject malicious input that, when used as RobotJS parameters, causes the application to perform unintended and harmful actions like executing system commands, accessing sensitive data, or disrupting system operations.
    • Unintended RobotJS Automation Errors (Medium Severity): Invalid or out-of-range parameters can lead to RobotJS performing actions outside of intended boundaries, causing application errors, data corruption, or unexpected system behavior due to incorrect automation.

  • Impact:

    • Malicious RobotJS Action Injection: Significantly reduces the risk by preventing attackers from directly manipulating RobotJS actions through crafted input parameters.
    • Unintended RobotJS Automation Errors: Substantially reduces the likelihood of errors caused by invalid parameters, improving application stability and the reliability of RobotJS-driven automation.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented in [Project Area: Input Processing Module]. Basic type checking exists for some RobotJS parameters, but comprehensive range, format validation, and sanitization are not consistently applied across all RobotJS action calls.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Missing in [Project Area: RobotJS Action Handlers]: Validation and sanitization are not consistently implemented directly before calls to RobotJS functions in various parts of the application.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Configuration Parsing for Automation]: Parameters for RobotJS actions read from configuration files are not validated or sanitized.
    • Missing in [Project Area: API Data Processing for Automation]: Data received from external APIs that is used to control RobotJS actions lacks validation and sanitization.

Mitigation Strategy: User Awareness and Explicit Consent for RobotJS Automation

  • Description:

    1. Identify user-impacting RobotJS actions: Determine which RobotJS actions directly affect the user's system interaction or could be perceived as intrusive (e.g., mouse and keyboard control outside the application window, screen content reading, clipboard access via automation).
    2. Implement explicit consent mechanisms before RobotJS actions: For each user-impacting RobotJS action, require explicit user consent before the action is executed. This can be achieved through:
      • Clear and informative prompts: Display dialog boxes or in-app prompts explaining the intended RobotJS action, its purpose, and potential impact on the user's system. The prompt should clearly state that RobotJS is being used for automation.
      • Granular consent options: Offer users fine-grained control over different categories of RobotJS actions, allowing them to selectively enable or disable certain types of automation.
      • Persistent consent management: Implement a mechanism to store and manage user consent preferences, allowing users to set their preferences once and have them persist across application sessions.
    3. Provide clear visual feedback during RobotJS automation: When RobotJS is actively automating actions, provide unambiguous visual cues to the user to indicate that automation is in progress. This could include:
      • Mouse cursor highlighting or change: Briefly highlight the mouse cursor or change its appearance when RobotJS is controlling it.
      • On-screen automation indicators: Display a small, unobtrusive icon or message on the screen to signal active RobotJS automation.
      • Application-specific UI feedback: Within the application's user interface, clearly display the status and progress of RobotJS-driven automation tasks.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • User Confusion and Mistrust (Medium Severity): Unexplained or unexpected RobotJS actions can confuse users, erode trust in the application, and potentially lead to users disabling necessary features or misinterpreting application behavior as malicious.
    • Perceived Privacy Violations (Medium Severity): Automated screen reading or clipboard access without user awareness can be perceived as privacy violations, even if unintentional, damaging user trust and potentially raising legal or ethical concerns.
    • Accidental Interference with Automation (Medium Severity): Users unaware of active RobotJS automation might unintentionally interfere with automated processes, leading to application errors, data corruption, or disruption of intended workflows.

  • Impact:

    • User Confusion and Mistrust: Significantly reduces the risk by ensuring users are informed and in control of RobotJS automation, fostering trust and improving user experience.
    • Perceived Privacy Violations: Partially mitigates the risk by making users aware of potentially privacy-sensitive RobotJS actions and giving them control over their execution.
    • Accidental Interference with Automation: Reduces the risk by improving user understanding of automation processes, minimizing the likelihood of unintended interference.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented in [Project Area: User Interface]. Some user-initiated actions trigger basic confirmation prompts, but these prompts often lack clear explanations about RobotJS involvement and the extent of automation. Visual feedback during RobotJS automation is minimal and inconsistent.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Missing in [Project Area: Consent Management Module]: A dedicated consent management module is needed to consistently handle user consent for various RobotJS actions and manage user preferences.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Visual Feedback System for Automation]: More robust and consistent visual feedback mechanisms are required to clearly and reliably indicate when RobotJS automation is active.
    • Missing in [Project Area: User Onboarding and Documentation]: User onboarding processes and documentation should clearly explain the application's use of RobotJS, the purpose of automation, and how users can manage consent and understand visual feedback.

Mitigation Strategy: Detailed Logging and Monitoring of RobotJS Function Calls

  • Description:

    1. Instrument code to log RobotJS function calls: Modify the application code to log every call to RobotJS functions (e.g., mouse.move, keyboard.typeString, screen.capture).
    2. Log relevant parameters for each RobotJS call: For each logged RobotJS function call, capture and record the parameters passed to the function. This includes:
      • Target coordinates for mouse actions.
      • Keys or text strings for keyboard actions.
      • Screen regions for screen capture actions.
      • Any other relevant parameters specific to the RobotJS function.
    3. Include contextual information in logs: Enhance log entries with contextual information to aid in analysis and incident response. This includes:
      • Timestamp of the RobotJS call.
      • User or process ID initiating the RobotJS action.
      • Application component or module making the RobotJS call.
      • Outcome of the RobotJS call (success or failure, if detectable).
    4. Centralize and secure RobotJS action logs: Store RobotJS action logs in a secure, centralized logging system that is protected from unauthorized access and tampering.
    5. Implement monitoring and alerting for anomalous RobotJS activity: Establish monitoring rules and alerts to detect unusual or suspicious patterns in RobotJS function call logs. This could include:
      • Unexpected sequences of RobotJS actions.
      • Excessive frequency of RobotJS calls.
      • RobotJS actions performed outside of normal operating hours.
      • RobotJS actions initiated by unusual users or processes.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Detection of Malicious Automation (High Severity): Detailed logging and monitoring of RobotJS calls are crucial for detecting malicious or unauthorized automation attempts, allowing for timely incident response and mitigation.
    • Post-Incident Forensic Analysis (High Severity): Comprehensive logs of RobotJS actions provide essential data for investigating security incidents involving RobotJS, enabling effective forensic analysis and root cause identification.
    • Insider Threat Detection Related to Automation (Medium Severity): Monitoring RobotJS logs can help identify potentially malicious or negligent actions by authorized users or internal processes that misuse or abuse RobotJS automation capabilities.
    • Debugging and Troubleshooting RobotJS Automation (Medium Severity): Logs of RobotJS function calls are invaluable for debugging automation logic, identifying errors in RobotJS interactions, and troubleshooting unexpected application behavior related to automation.

  • Impact:

    • Detection of Malicious Automation: Significantly improves the ability to detect and respond to malicious automation attempts leveraging RobotJS.
    • Post-Incident Forensic Analysis: Substantially enhances the effectiveness of post-incident investigations and forensic analysis related to RobotJS usage.
    • Insider Threat Detection Related to Automation: Partially mitigates the risk of insider threats involving misuse of RobotJS automation.
    • Debugging and Troubleshooting RobotJS Automation: Significantly improves debugging and troubleshooting capabilities for RobotJS-driven automation.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented in [Project Area: Logging Module]. Basic application logging exists, but detailed logging of RobotJS function calls, including parameters and contextual information, is not implemented. Logs are not centrally managed or monitored for anomalous RobotJS activity.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Missing in [Project Area: RobotJS Action Handlers]: Code within RobotJS action handlers needs to be instrumented to log function calls and parameters.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Centralized Logging System Integration]: RobotJS action logs need to be integrated into a centralized logging system for secure storage and management.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Monitoring and Alerting Configuration]: Monitoring rules and alerting mechanisms need to be configured to analyze RobotJS action logs and detect anomalous activity patterns.

Mitigation Strategy: Sandboxed Execution Environment for RobotJS Components

  • Description:

    1. Isolate RobotJS-dependent application components: Identify the specific modules or components of the application that directly utilize the RobotJS library.
    2. Deploy RobotJS components in a sandboxed environment: Run the isolated RobotJS components within a restricted or sandboxed execution environment. This can be achieved using:
      • Operating System-level sandboxing: Utilize OS features like containers (Docker, Podman), or process sandboxing mechanisms (e.g., namespaces, cgroups on Linux, AppContainers on Windows) to limit the RobotJS component's access to system resources and the broader application environment.
      • Virtualization: Deploy the RobotJS component within a virtual machine (VM) to provide a strong isolation boundary from the host system and other application components.
    3. Restrict permissions within the sandbox: Configure the sandboxed environment to grant the RobotJS component only the minimum necessary permissions required for its intended functionality. This includes limiting:
      • File system access: Restrict access to only necessary files and directories.
      • Network access: Limit or disable network access if not required for the RobotJS component's operation.
      • System capabilities: Drop unnecessary system capabilities to reduce the potential attack surface within the sandbox.
    4. Establish secure inter-process communication (IPC): If the sandboxed RobotJS component needs to communicate with other parts of the application, implement secure and well-defined IPC mechanisms (e.g., APIs, message queues, secure sockets) with strict authorization and data validation at the communication boundaries.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Containment of RobotJS-Related Security Breaches (High Severity): If a vulnerability in the RobotJS component or its dependencies is exploited, sandboxing limits the attacker's ability to escalate privileges or move laterally to compromise other parts of the application or the underlying system.
    • Reduced Attack Surface for RobotJS Exploits (Medium Severity): By isolating RobotJS, the overall attack surface exposed by the application is reduced, as vulnerabilities specifically within RobotJS or its execution environment are less likely to impact the broader application or system.
    • Improved Application Stability and Resilience (Medium Severity): Sandboxing can prevent errors, resource exhaustion, or crashes within the RobotJS component from propagating to other parts of the application, improving overall stability and resilience.

  • Impact:

    • Containment of RobotJS-Related Security Breaches: Significantly reduces the potential impact of a security breach originating from the RobotJS component by limiting the attacker's scope of access and control.
    • Reduced Attack Surface for RobotJS Exploits: Partially reduces the overall attack surface, making it more difficult for attackers to exploit vulnerabilities specifically related to RobotJS.
    • Improved Application Stability and Resilience: Partially improves application stability by isolating potential issues within the RobotJS component and preventing them from affecting other parts of the application.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Not implemented. The application currently runs as a monolithic process without sandboxing or containerization of RobotJS components.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Missing in [Project Area: Deployment Architecture and Infrastructure]: The application's deployment architecture needs to be redesigned to incorporate sandboxing or containerization for RobotJS-dependent components. This requires changes to infrastructure configuration and deployment processes.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Inter-Component Communication Layer]: Secure IPC mechanisms need to be implemented to enable communication between the sandboxed RobotJS component and other application components while maintaining security boundaries.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Sandbox Configuration and Security Policies]: Detailed configuration of the sandbox environment, including resource limits, permission restrictions, and security policies, needs to be defined and implemented.

Mitigation Strategy: Focused Code Review and Security Audits of RobotJS Integration

  • Description:

    1. Prioritize RobotJS-related code in code reviews: During code reviews for new features or changes, specifically prioritize and scrutinize code sections that interact with the RobotJS library.
    2. Develop RobotJS-specific security code review checklist: Create a checklist of security considerations specific to RobotJS integration to guide code reviewers. This checklist should include items such as:
      • Verification of input validation and sanitization for all RobotJS action parameters.
      • Review of the logic and security implications of automation sequences implemented using RobotJS.
      • Assessment of error handling mechanisms in RobotJS interactions to prevent unexpected behavior or security bypasses.
      • Confirmation that RobotJS components are running with the minimum necessary privileges and within appropriate security contexts.
      • Analysis of potential race conditions or concurrency issues in RobotJS-driven automation.
    3. Conduct regular security audits with RobotJS focus: Schedule periodic security audits of the application, with a specific focus on the security aspects of RobotJS integration. These audits should include:
      • Manual security code review: In-depth manual review of RobotJS-related code by security experts, guided by the RobotJS-specific security checklist.
      • Static and dynamic security analysis: Utilize static analysis security testing (SAST) and dynamic analysis security testing (DAST) tools to identify potential vulnerabilities in RobotJS integration. Configure these tools to specifically target RobotJS-related code patterns and potential weaknesses.
      • Penetration testing focused on automation vulnerabilities: Conduct penetration testing exercises specifically designed to identify and exploit vulnerabilities related to RobotJS-driven automation, such as malicious automation injection or privilege escalation through automation flaws.
    4. Address identified RobotJS security vulnerabilities promptly: Prioritize and remediate any security vulnerabilities related to RobotJS integration identified during code reviews or security audits in a timely and effective manner, following a defined vulnerability management process.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Proactive Identification of RobotJS Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Focused code review and security audits are crucial for proactively identifying and addressing security vulnerabilities specifically related to RobotJS integration before they can be exploited by attackers.
    • Mitigation of Logic Flaws in Automation (Medium Severity): Code reviews can detect subtle logic flaws in automation sequences implemented with RobotJS that could lead to unintended actions, security vulnerabilities, or application errors.
    • Detection of Configuration and Implementation Errors (Medium Severity): Security audits can identify misconfigurations, insecure coding practices, or implementation errors in RobotJS integration that could introduce security weaknesses.
    • Improved Overall Security Posture of RobotJS Integration (Medium Severity): Regular security assessments and code reviews contribute to a continuously improving security posture for the application's use of RobotJS, reducing the likelihood of security incidents over time.

  • Impact:

    • Proactive Identification of RobotJS Vulnerabilities: Significantly reduces the risk of exploitation of RobotJS-specific vulnerabilities by proactively identifying and addressing them.
    • Mitigation of Logic Flaws in Automation: Partially mitigates the risk of vulnerabilities arising from logic flaws in RobotJS-driven automation.
    • Detection of Configuration and Implementation Errors: Substantially reduces the risk of security issues caused by misconfigurations or implementation errors in RobotJS integration.
    • Improved Overall Security Posture of RobotJS Integration: Contributes to a long-term improvement in the security of RobotJS integration, reducing the overall risk profile.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented in [Project Area: Development Process and Security Practices]. Code reviews are conducted for code changes, but they do not consistently include a specific focus on RobotJS security considerations. Security audits are performed infrequently and may not always include a dedicated focus on RobotJS integration.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Missing in [Project Area: Code Review Guidelines and Checklists]: RobotJS-specific security guidelines and checklists need to be developed and integrated into the code review process.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Security Audit Plan and Schedule]: A regular schedule for security audits, with a defined scope that includes a dedicated focus on RobotJS integration, needs to be established and implemented.
    • Missing in [Project Area: Security Training for Developers and Reviewers]: Developers and code reviewers need to receive security training that specifically covers secure coding practices and common vulnerabilities related to RobotJS usage.