Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
127 lines (96 loc) · 13.3 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

127 lines (96 loc) · 13.3 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for xianyi/openblas

Mitigation Strategy: Maintain Up-to-Date OpenBLAS Version

  • Description:

    1. Identify Current OpenBLAS Version: Determine the version of OpenBLAS your application is currently using.
    2. Monitor for Updates: Regularly check the official OpenBLAS GitHub repository (https://github.com/xianyi/openblas) or relevant distribution channels for new releases and security announcements related to OpenBLAS.
    3. Review Release Notes for Security Patches: When a new version is released, carefully review the release notes to identify if it includes any security patches or bug fixes that address potential vulnerabilities in OpenBLAS.
    4. Update OpenBLAS Dependency: Update your project's dependency management configuration to use the latest stable and patched version of OpenBLAS.
    5. Retest Application: After updating OpenBLAS, thoroughly retest your application to ensure compatibility and that the update hasn't introduced any regressions. Focus on areas of your application that heavily utilize OpenBLAS functionalities.
    6. Deploy Updated Application: Deploy the application with the updated OpenBLAS library to all environments.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Exploitation of Known OpenBLAS Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Outdated OpenBLAS versions may contain known security vulnerabilities that could be exploited by attackers to compromise the application or system through OpenBLAS functionalities. This could lead to crashes, unexpected behavior, or potentially more severe exploits depending on the vulnerability.

  • Impact:

    • Exploitation of Known OpenBLAS Vulnerabilities: High Reduction. Updating directly patches known vulnerabilities within OpenBLAS, significantly reducing the risk of exploitation targeting these specific flaws in the library itself.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented. We have a general dependency update process, but no specific automated tracking for OpenBLAS updates.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • No automated system to specifically track and alert on new OpenBLAS releases and security patches.
    • No dedicated schedule for regularly reviewing and updating OpenBLAS specifically.

Mitigation Strategy: Dependency Scanning for OpenBLAS Vulnerabilities

  • Description:

    1. Integrate Dependency Scanning Tool: Implement a dependency scanning tool in your development pipeline that is capable of identifying known vulnerabilities in binary libraries like OpenBLAS.
    2. Configure Tool for OpenBLAS: Ensure the tool is configured to specifically scan and identify vulnerabilities reported for OpenBLAS. This might involve updating vulnerability databases or configuring specific scanners for binary libraries.
    3. Automated Scans: Run dependency scans automatically as part of your CI/CD pipeline (e.g., on each build or commit).
    4. Review OpenBLAS Scan Results: Regularly review the scan results specifically for OpenBLAS. The tool should report any identified vulnerabilities, their severity, and potentially suggest updated versions of OpenBLAS.
    5. Prioritize and Update Vulnerable OpenBLAS: If vulnerabilities are found in the used OpenBLAS version, prioritize updating to a patched version as soon as possible.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Exploitation of Known OpenBLAS Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Proactively identifies known vulnerabilities within the OpenBLAS library itself, allowing for timely patching before exploitation.
    • Use of Vulnerable OpenBLAS Versions (Medium Severity): Prevents accidental or unintentional use of vulnerable OpenBLAS versions in the application by providing automated checks.

  • Impact:

    • Exploitation of Known OpenBLAS Vulnerabilities: High Reduction. Provides early detection of vulnerabilities in OpenBLAS, enabling proactive mitigation and significantly reducing the window of opportunity for attackers to exploit these flaws in the library.
    • Use of Vulnerable OpenBLAS Versions: Medium Reduction. Reduces the risk of human error in dependency management leading to the inclusion of vulnerable OpenBLAS versions.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Not implemented specifically for OpenBLAS or binary dependencies. Our current scanning is more focused on application code and higher-level dependencies.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Integration of a dependency scanning tool that effectively scans binary libraries like OpenBLAS for known vulnerabilities.
    • Configuration of the tool to specifically target and report on OpenBLAS vulnerabilities.
    • Automated alerts and reporting for detected OpenBLAS vulnerabilities.

Mitigation Strategy: Verify Download Integrity of OpenBLAS

  • Description:

    1. Obtain Checksums from Official Source: When downloading OpenBLAS (especially pre-built binaries), always locate and obtain the official checksums (e.g., SHA256) provided by the official OpenBLAS distribution source (e.g., GitHub releases, official website if applicable).
    2. Download OpenBLAS and Checksum File: Download both the OpenBLAS library file and its corresponding checksum file.
    3. Calculate Checksum Locally: After downloading, use a checksum utility to calculate the checksum of the downloaded OpenBLAS file on your local system.
    4. Compare Checksums: Compare the locally calculated checksum with the official checksum provided by OpenBLAS.
    5. Proceed if Checksums Match: If the checksums match exactly, it confirms the integrity of the downloaded OpenBLAS file, and it is highly likely to be the authentic, untampered library. Proceed with using this file.
    6. Discard and Re-download if Mismatch: If the checksums do not match, it indicates potential corruption or tampering during download. Discard the downloaded OpenBLAS file and attempt to re-download from a trusted official source. Investigate the download process if mismatches persist.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Compromised OpenBLAS Download via Man-in-the-Middle (Medium Severity): Verifying checksums helps detect if the OpenBLAS download was intercepted and replaced with a malicious or corrupted version during transit.
    • Download Corruption of OpenBLAS (Low Severity): Ensures the downloaded OpenBLAS file is complete and not corrupted during the download process, preventing potential instability or unexpected behavior arising from a faulty library.

  • Impact:

    • Compromised OpenBLAS Download via Man-in-the-Middle: Medium Reduction. Significantly reduces the risk of using a maliciously altered OpenBLAS library obtained through compromised download channels.
    • Download Corruption of OpenBLAS: Low Reduction. Prevents issues related to corrupted OpenBLAS libraries, improving application stability and reliability when using OpenBLAS.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented. Developers are generally aware of checksums for important downloads, but it's not a mandatory, automated step for OpenBLAS dependency management.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Formalized and enforced procedure for verifying checksums of OpenBLAS downloads.
    • Automation of checksum verification within our build scripts or dependency management tools for OpenBLAS.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Build Process for OpenBLAS (If Building from Source)

  • Description:

    1. Use a Secure Build Environment: If you build OpenBLAS from source, use a dedicated, hardened, and regularly updated build environment. This environment should be isolated and protected from unauthorized access.
    2. Trusted Build Tools: Utilize trusted and officially distributed compilers and build tools for compiling OpenBLAS. Ensure these tools are up-to-date and patched against known vulnerabilities.
    3. Apply Security Patches to Build System: Keep the operating system and all software components of the build system patched with the latest security updates.
    4. Enable Compiler Security Flags for OpenBLAS: When compiling OpenBLAS, use compiler flags that enhance security, such as -fstack-protector-strong, -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2, -fPIE, and -pie. These flags help mitigate potential buffer overflows and other memory corruption vulnerabilities within OpenBLAS itself.
    5. Minimize Build Dependencies: Reduce the number of external dependencies required to build OpenBLAS to minimize the attack surface of the build process.
    6. Secure Storage of Built OpenBLAS Binaries: Store the compiled OpenBLAS binaries in a secure and access-controlled repository to prevent unauthorized modification or access.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Compromised OpenBLAS Binaries via Build Environment Compromise (Medium to High Severity): A compromised build environment could be used to inject malicious code into the OpenBLAS library during the compilation process, leading to backdoored or vulnerable binaries.
    • Vulnerabilities Introduced During Build Process (Low to Medium Severity): Insecure build practices or vulnerable build tools could inadvertently introduce vulnerabilities into the compiled OpenBLAS library.

  • Impact:

    • Compromised OpenBLAS Binaries via Build Environment Compromise: Medium to High Reduction. Significantly reduces the risk of using compromised OpenBLAS binaries by securing the build environment and process.
    • Vulnerabilities Introduced During Build Process: Low to Medium Reduction. Minimizes the risk of unintentionally introducing vulnerabilities into OpenBLAS during compilation through secure build practices and compiler flags.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Partially implemented. We use dedicated build servers, but the build environment hardening and specific compiler flags for OpenBLAS are not fully standardized or enforced.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Formalized and documented secure build process specifically for OpenBLAS when building from source.
    • Automated enforcement of secure compiler flags when building OpenBLAS.
    • Regular security audits of the OpenBLAS build environment and process.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Compilation Flags for OpenBLAS

  • Description:

    1. Identify Relevant Compiler Flags: Research and identify compiler flags that enhance security and are applicable to compiling C/C++/Fortran code, which is the language base of OpenBLAS. Examples include -fstack-protector-strong, -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2, -fPIE, and -pie.
    2. Integrate Flags into Build System: Modify your OpenBLAS build system (e.g., Makefiles, CMakeLists.txt) to include these security-enhancing compiler flags when compiling OpenBLAS source code.
    3. Test with Flags Enabled: Thoroughly test OpenBLAS after enabling these flags to ensure they do not introduce any performance regressions or compatibility issues in your application's use of OpenBLAS.
    4. Enforce Flags in Build Pipeline: Ensure that these security flags are consistently applied in your CI/CD pipeline and build process for all OpenBLAS builds.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Stack Buffer Overflows in OpenBLAS (Medium to High Severity): Flags like -fstack-protector-strong provide runtime protection against stack buffer overflows within OpenBLAS, making exploitation more difficult.
    • Heap Buffer Overflows in OpenBLAS (Medium to High Severity): Flags like -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 enable compile-time and runtime checks that can detect certain types of heap buffer overflows and other memory corruption issues in OpenBLAS.
    • Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) Bypass (Medium Severity): Flags like -fPIE and -pie enable Position Independent Executables and ASLR, making it harder for attackers to reliably exploit memory corruption vulnerabilities in OpenBLAS by randomizing memory addresses.

  • Impact:

    • Stack Buffer Overflows in OpenBLAS: Medium Reduction. Makes stack buffer overflow exploitation significantly harder by adding runtime checks and protections.
    • Heap Buffer Overflows in OpenBLAS: Medium Reduction. Increases the likelihood of detecting and preventing heap buffer overflows through compile-time and runtime checks.
    • Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) Bypass: Medium Reduction. Enhances ASLR effectiveness, making memory corruption exploits less reliable and more difficult to execute.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Not implemented specifically for OpenBLAS. We might use some general security flags in our overall compilation process, but not specifically targeted and enforced for OpenBLAS.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Systematic integration of security-enhancing compiler flags into the OpenBLAS build process.
    • Automated enforcement of these flags in our build pipeline for OpenBLAS.
    • Documentation and guidelines for developers on using secure compilation flags for OpenBLAS.