Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
169 lines (126 loc) · 23.7 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

169 lines (126 loc) · 23.7 KB

Deep Security Analysis of Apache Mesos

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective:

This deep analysis aims to provide a thorough security evaluation of Apache Mesos, focusing on its core components and their interactions, to identify potential security vulnerabilities and recommend specific, actionable mitigation strategies. The analysis will be grounded in the provided security design review and will leverage inferred architecture, component functionalities, and data flows derived from the Mesos codebase and documentation (as represented in the design review).

Scope:

The scope of this analysis encompasses the key components of a Mesos cluster as depicted in the "C4 Container" diagram and described in the accompanying documentation. Specifically, the analysis will cover:

  • Mesos Master Process: Including Scheduler, Allocator, Registry, and Master API.
  • Mesos Agent Process: Including Executor (Containerizer), Resource Providers, and Agent API.
  • Frameworks: Focusing on the security interactions between Frameworks and Mesos.
  • Zookeeper: As the coordination service critical for Mesos operation.

The analysis will primarily focus on the security aspects of these components within the context of the described "Deployment Solution: Cloud-based Mesos Cluster on AWS" and "Build" process. Infrastructure security (AWS VPC, EC2 instances) will be considered in relation to Mesos deployment but will not be the primary focus. Application-level security within Frameworks is also outside the primary scope, except where it directly interacts with Mesos security mechanisms.

Methodology:

This analysis will employ a risk-based approach, following these steps:

  1. Architecture and Data Flow Inference: Based on the provided C4 diagrams and component descriptions, infer the architecture and data flow within the Mesos cluster. This will involve understanding component interactions, data exchange, and control flow.
  2. Threat Identification: For each key component and interaction, identify potential security threats and vulnerabilities, considering the OWASP Top Ten, common distributed system vulnerabilities, and risks specific to resource management platforms.
  3. Security Control Mapping: Map the existing and recommended security controls from the security design review to the identified threats and relevant Mesos components.
  4. Gap Analysis: Identify gaps between the existing security controls, recommended controls, and the identified threats.
  5. Tailored Recommendations and Mitigation Strategies: Develop specific, actionable, and Mesos-tailored security recommendations and mitigation strategies to address the identified gaps and threats. These recommendations will be aligned with the security requirements outlined in the design review.
  6. Prioritization: Prioritize recommendations based on the severity of the potential impact and the likelihood of exploitation, considering the business risks outlined in the security design review.

This methodology will ensure a focused and practical security analysis directly relevant to the Apache Mesos project and its intended use case.

2. Security Implications Breakdown by Key Component

2.1 Mesos Master Process

  • Functionality & Data Flow: The Master Process is the central control plane, responsible for resource management, scheduling, and cluster state. It receives resource offers from Agents, receives resource requests from Frameworks, makes scheduling decisions, and persists cluster state in the Registry. It communicates with Agents via API calls and coordinates with Zookeeper for leader election and distributed consensus.
  • Security Implications & Threats:
    • Master API Vulnerabilities (Requirement: Input Validation, Cryptography, Authentication, Authorization): The Master API is the primary interface for Frameworks, administrators, and potentially users. Vulnerabilities like injection flaws, insecure authentication/authorization, or lack of input validation can lead to unauthorized access, data breaches, or denial of service. Threats: API abuse, unauthorized framework registration, malicious task submission, information disclosure.
    • Scheduler/Allocator Logic Flaws (Requirement: Authorization, Resource Isolation): Flaws in the scheduling or allocation logic could lead to resource starvation for certain frameworks, denial of service, or privilege escalation if scheduling decisions are not properly authorized or if they bypass resource isolation mechanisms. Threats: Resource starvation, unfair resource allocation, privilege escalation through scheduling manipulation.
    • Registry (State Store) Compromise (Requirement: Cryptography, Authorization): The Registry stores critical cluster state. If compromised due to insufficient access control or lack of encryption, attackers could gain insights into cluster configuration, running applications, or even manipulate the cluster state leading to instability or data breaches. Threats: Data breach of cluster metadata, cluster manipulation, denial of service by corrupting state.
    • Zookeeper Communication Security (Requirement: Authentication, Cryptography): Insecure communication between the Master and Zookeeper can lead to man-in-the-middle attacks, allowing attackers to intercept or manipulate coordination data, potentially disrupting leader election or cluster configuration. Threats: Cluster disruption, control plane takeover, denial of service by manipulating leader election.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) Attacks (Requirement: Input Validation, Authorization): The Master Process is a critical component and a target for DoS attacks. Unvalidated inputs, resource exhaustion through excessive API requests, or vulnerabilities in resource handling could be exploited to bring down the Master and disrupt the entire cluster. Threats: Cluster downtime, service disruption for all applications.

2.2 Mesos Agent Process

  • Functionality & Data Flow: The Agent Process runs on each node, reporting available resources to the Master, receiving task assignments, and executing tasks using Executors. It interacts with Resource Providers to manage local resources and exposes an Agent API for internal communication and potentially limited external management.
  • Security Implications & Threats:
    • Agent API Vulnerabilities (Requirement: Input Validation, Authentication, Authorization): Similar to the Master API, vulnerabilities in the Agent API could allow unauthorized control over the Agent, potentially leading to task manipulation, resource theft, or node compromise. Threats: Unauthorized task manipulation, node compromise, resource theft.
    • Executor (Containerizer) Security (Requirement: Resource Isolation, Cryptography): The Executor is responsible for running tasks in containers. Security vulnerabilities in the container runtime (e.g., Docker, Mesos Containerizer) or misconfigurations could lead to container escapes, allowing tasks to break out of isolation and potentially compromise the Agent node or other containers. Threats: Container escape, host node compromise, inter-container interference, data breaches.
    • Resource Isolation Weaknesses (Requirement: Resource Isolation): If resource isolation mechanisms (namespaces, cgroups) are not properly configured or have vulnerabilities, applications might be able to interfere with each other, leading to performance degradation, data leakage, or even security breaches. Threats: Inter-application interference, data leakage, denial of service between applications.
    • Resource Provider Exploitation (Requirement: Authorization, Resource Isolation): Vulnerabilities in Resource Providers could be exploited to gain unauthorized access to resources (e.g., GPUs, storage), bypass resource quotas, or potentially escalate privileges. Threats: Resource theft, privilege escalation, denial of service by resource exhaustion.
    • Agent Authentication and Authorization (Requirement: Authentication, Authorization): Weak or missing authentication between Agents and Masters, or insufficient authorization of Master commands on Agents, could allow rogue Agents to join the cluster or compromised Masters to issue malicious commands to Agents. Threats: Rogue agent joining cluster, unauthorized command execution, cluster instability.

2.3 Frameworks

  • Functionality & Data Flow: Frameworks are applications that run on Mesos. They register with the Master, receive resource offers, and launch tasks on Agents. Frameworks interact with the Master API to manage their lifecycle and tasks.
  • Security Implications & Threats (in relation to Mesos):
    • Framework Registration and Authentication (Requirement: Authentication, Authorization): If framework registration is not properly authenticated and authorized, malicious or compromised frameworks could register with the Mesos cluster and potentially launch malicious tasks, consume resources, or interfere with legitimate frameworks. Threats: Malicious framework registration, resource abuse, denial of service, unauthorized access.
    • Task Submission and Authorization (Requirement: Authorization, Input Validation): Improper authorization checks on task submissions from frameworks could allow frameworks to launch tasks they are not authorized to, potentially gaining access to resources or data they shouldn't. Input validation vulnerabilities in task parameters could lead to command injection or other attacks within the Executor. Threats: Unauthorized task execution, privilege escalation, command injection in tasks.
    • Resource Offer Manipulation (Requirement: Authorization, Scheduler Security): While less direct, vulnerabilities in the scheduling logic or insufficient authorization could potentially allow malicious frameworks to influence resource offers in their favor, leading to unfair resource allocation or denial of service for other frameworks. Threats: Resource starvation for legitimate frameworks, unfair resource allocation.

2.4 Zookeeper

  • Functionality & Data Flow: Zookeeper is used for leader election among Mesos Masters, configuration management, and distributed synchronization. Masters communicate with Zookeeper to maintain cluster consistency and high availability.
  • Security Implications & Threats:
    • Zookeeper Access Control (Requirement: Authorization): Insufficient access control to Zookeeper could allow unauthorized entities to read or modify cluster configuration, disrupt leader election, or cause data corruption, leading to cluster instability or failure. Threats: Cluster disruption, configuration manipulation, denial of service.
    • Zookeeper Authentication (Requirement: Authentication): Weak or missing authentication for Mesos Masters connecting to Zookeeper could allow unauthorized Masters to join the cluster or impersonate legitimate Masters, potentially leading to cluster takeover or disruption. Threats: Rogue master joining cluster, cluster takeover, denial of service.
    • Zookeeper Data Integrity and Confidentiality (Requirement: Cryptography): While Zookeeper primarily stores metadata, ensuring data integrity is crucial for cluster stability. Depending on configuration and sensitivity of stored data, encryption of data in transit and at rest within Zookeeper might be necessary. Threats: Data corruption leading to cluster instability, potential information disclosure.
    • Zookeeper Availability (Requirement: Availability): Zookeeper is a critical dependency for Mesos. DoS attacks against Zookeeper or failures in Zookeeper itself can directly impact the availability and functionality of the entire Mesos cluster. Threats: Cluster downtime, service disruption for all applications.

3. Actionable and Tailored Mitigation Strategies

Based on the identified threats and security implications, the following actionable and tailored mitigation strategies are recommended for Apache Mesos:

3.1 Master Process Security:

  • Recommendation 1: Strengthen Master API Security (Addresses: API Vulnerabilities, DoS Attacks, Requirements: Input Validation, Cryptography, Authentication, Authorization).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement robust input validation and sanitization: For all Master API endpoints, rigorously validate and sanitize all input data to prevent injection attacks (command injection, XSS, etc.). Use parameterized queries or prepared statements where applicable.
      • Enforce strong authentication and fine-grained authorization: Implement mutual TLS authentication for communication between Masters, Agents, and Frameworks. Utilize Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) for Master API access to restrict operations based on user roles and framework permissions. Leverage Mesos ACLs for authorization of operations.
      • Implement API rate limiting and request throttling: Protect against DoS attacks by limiting the number of requests from specific sources or for specific API endpoints. Implement request throttling to prevent resource exhaustion.
      • Regularly audit and pen-test Master API: Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing specifically targeting the Master API to identify and address vulnerabilities proactively.

  • Recommendation 2: Enhance Scheduler and Allocator Security (Addresses: Scheduler/Allocator Logic Flaws, Resource Starvation, Requirements: Authorization, Resource Isolation).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement and enforce secure scheduling policies: Carefully design and configure scheduling policies to prevent resource starvation and ensure fair resource allocation. Clearly define and enforce resource quotas and limits for frameworks.
      • Thoroughly review and test scheduling logic: Conduct rigorous code reviews and testing of the scheduler and allocator logic to identify and fix potential flaws that could lead to unfair resource allocation or privilege escalation.
      • Implement authorization checks within scheduling decisions: Ensure that scheduling decisions are made based on proper authorization checks, preventing unauthorized frameworks from influencing resource allocation unfairly.

  • Recommendation 3: Secure the Registry (State Store) (Addresses: Registry Compromise, Requirements: Cryptography, Authorization).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement strong access control to the Registry: Restrict access to the Registry to only authorized Mesos Master processes. Use network segmentation and firewall rules to further limit access.
      • Encrypt sensitive data at rest in the Registry: Encrypt sensitive data stored in the Registry, such as secrets, credentials, and potentially application metadata. Use strong encryption algorithms and secure key management practices.
      • Implement data integrity checks for the Registry: Utilize checksums or other integrity mechanisms to detect data corruption or tampering in the Registry.
      • Regularly backup and test Registry recovery: Implement regular backups of the Registry and test the recovery process to ensure data availability and resilience in case of failures or security incidents.

  • Recommendation 4: Secure Master-Zookeeper Communication (Addresses: Zookeeper Communication Security, Requirements: Authentication, Cryptography).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Enable authentication and authorization for Zookeeper: Configure Zookeeper to require authentication for all client connections, including Mesos Masters. Use strong authentication mechanisms like Kerberos or TLS client certificates. Implement ACLs in Zookeeper to restrict access to sensitive data and operations.
      • Encrypt communication between Masters and Zookeeper: Use TLS encryption for all communication between Mesos Masters and Zookeeper to protect against man-in-the-middle attacks.

3.2 Agent Process Security:

  • Recommendation 5: Harden Agent API Security (Addresses: Agent API Vulnerabilities, Requirements: Input Validation, Authentication, Authorization).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Apply input validation and sanitization to Agent API: Implement input validation and sanitization for all Agent API endpoints, similar to the Master API.
      • Enforce authentication and authorization for Agent API: Implement authentication for Agent API access, restricting access to authorized Masters and potentially administrators. Use authorization to control operations that can be performed via the Agent API. Consider limiting Agent API exposure to the network.

  • Recommendation 6: Strengthen Executor (Containerizer) Security (Addresses: Executor Security, Container Escape, Requirements: Resource Isolation, Cryptography).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Utilize secure container runtimes: Use container runtimes with strong security features and a good security track record (e.g., Docker with security hardening, containerd). Regularly update container runtimes to patch vulnerabilities.
      • Implement robust container security configurations: Configure container runtimes with security best practices, such as using seccomp profiles, AppArmor or SELinux, and limiting container capabilities.
      • Regularly scan container images for vulnerabilities: Integrate container image scanning into the build and deployment pipeline to identify and remediate vulnerabilities in base images and application dependencies.
      • Enforce resource limits and quotas for containers: Utilize resource limits (CPU, memory, storage) and quotas to prevent resource exhaustion and DoS attacks from within containers.

  • Recommendation 7: Enhance Resource Isolation Mechanisms (Addresses: Resource Isolation Weaknesses, Inter-application Interference, Requirements: Resource Isolation).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Properly configure Linux namespaces and cgroups: Ensure that Linux namespaces (PID, network, mount, IPC, UTS) and cgroups are correctly configured to provide strong isolation between containers.
      • Utilize security-focused containerization technologies: Explore and utilize containerization technologies that offer enhanced security features, such as sandboxed containers or lightweight VMs for stronger isolation.
      • Regularly audit and test resource isolation: Conduct regular audits and penetration testing to verify the effectiveness of resource isolation mechanisms and identify potential bypasses.

  • Recommendation 8: Secure Resource Providers (Addresses: Resource Provider Exploitation, Resource Theft, Requirements: Authorization, Resource Isolation).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement access control for Resource Providers: Restrict access to Resource Providers to only authorized Executors and Agent processes.
      • Enforce resource quotas and limits within Resource Providers: Implement resource quotas and limits within Resource Providers to prevent unauthorized resource consumption or abuse.
      • Regularly audit and secure Resource Provider code: Conduct security audits and code reviews of Resource Provider implementations to identify and fix vulnerabilities.

  • Recommendation 9: Strengthen Agent Authentication to Master (Addresses: Agent Authentication and Authorization, Rogue Agent, Requirements: Authentication, Authorization).

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement mutual TLS authentication between Agents and Masters: Enforce mutual TLS authentication to ensure that Agents and Masters mutually authenticate each other, preventing rogue Agents from joining the cluster and unauthorized Masters from controlling Agents.
      • Regularly rotate Agent authentication credentials: Implement a mechanism to regularly rotate Agent authentication credentials to limit the impact of compromised credentials.

3.3 Framework Security (Mesos Interaction):

  • Recommendation 10: Secure Framework Registration and Task Submission (Addresses: Framework Registration and Authentication, Task Submission and Authorization, Requirements: Authentication, Authorization, Input Validation).
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement strong authentication and authorization for framework registration: Require frameworks to authenticate themselves during registration using strong authentication mechanisms (e.g., Kerberos, OAuth 2.0, TLS client certificates). Implement authorization policies to control which frameworks are allowed to register and access resources.
      • Enforce authorization for task submission: Implement authorization checks to ensure that frameworks are only allowed to submit tasks within their allocated resources and according to defined policies.
      • Apply input validation to task parameters: Validate and sanitize all task parameters submitted by frameworks to prevent command injection and other attacks within Executors.

3.4 Zookeeper Security:

  • Recommendation 11: Harden Zookeeper Security (Addresses: Zookeeper Access Control, Zookeeper Authentication, Zookeeper Data Integrity and Confidentiality, Zookeeper Availability, Requirements: Authorization, Authentication, Cryptography, Availability).
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Implement strong access control lists (ACLs) in Zookeeper: Configure Zookeeper ACLs to restrict access to sensitive data and operations to only authorized Mesos components.
      • Enable authentication for Zookeeper clients: Require authentication for all clients connecting to Zookeeper, including Mesos Masters. Use strong authentication mechanisms like Kerberos or TLS client certificates.
      • Encrypt Zookeeper data in transit and at rest: Enable TLS encryption for communication between Zookeeper clients and servers and between Zookeeper servers themselves. Consider encrypting Zookeeper data at rest if sensitive information is stored.
      • Implement Zookeeper monitoring and alerting: Implement comprehensive monitoring of Zookeeper health and performance. Set up alerts for critical events, such as leader election changes, connection failures, and performance degradation.
      • Follow Zookeeper hardening guidelines: Adhere to Zookeeper security hardening guidelines and best practices for deployment and configuration.

Prioritization:

The recommendations should be prioritized based on risk and feasibility. High priority recommendations include:

  • Strengthening Master and Agent API security (Recommendations 1 & 5): APIs are external interfaces and prime targets for attacks.
  • Securing the Registry (State Store) (Recommendation 3): Compromise of the Registry can have widespread impact.
  • Enhancing Executor (Containerizer) Security and Resource Isolation (Recommendations 6 & 7): These directly impact application security and isolation.
  • Securing Zookeeper (Recommendation 11): Zookeeper is critical infrastructure for Mesos.

Lower priority, but still important, recommendations include:

  • Enhancing Scheduler and Allocator Security (Recommendation 2): Primarily impacts resource management fairness and DoS.
  • Securing Resource Providers (Recommendation 8): Impacts resource access control and privilege escalation.
  • Strengthening Agent Authentication to Master (Recommendation 9): Impacts cluster integrity and rogue agent risks.
  • Securing Framework Registration and Task Submission (Recommendation 10): Impacts framework-level security and malicious framework risks.
  • Securing Master-Zookeeper Communication (Recommendation 4): Impacts control plane security and MITM risks.

This prioritized list should be reviewed and adjusted based on the specific risk tolerance and security maturity of the organization deploying Mesos. Regular security assessments and penetration testing are crucial to validate the effectiveness of these mitigation strategies and identify any new vulnerabilities.