Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
195 lines (163 loc) · 17.9 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

195 lines (163 loc) · 17.9 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for ariya/phantomjs

Objective: Attacker's Goal: To compromise application that use given project by exploiting weaknesses or vulnerabilities within the project itself.

Attack Tree Visualization

Attack Goal: Compromise Application via PhantomJS [CRITICAL NODE]

└─── 1. Exploit PhantomJS Vulnerabilities [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
    ├─── 1.1. Exploit Known PhantomJS Security Flaws [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
    │   └─── 1.1.1. Target Outdated PhantomJS Version [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
    │       └─── 1.1.1.1. Identify and Exploit Publicly Disclosed Vulnerabilities (e.g., CVEs) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
    └─── 1.2. Exploit PhantomJS Specific Features/Bugs
        ├─── 1.2.2. Exploit File System Access vulnerabilities [HIGH-RISK PATH]
        │   └─── 1.2.2.1. Manipulate file paths in PhantomJS scripts to access unauthorized files [HIGH-RISK PATH]
        └─── 1.2.3. Exploit Network Access vulnerabilities [HIGH-RISK PATH]
            └─── 1.2.3.1. Trigger Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) [HIGH-RISK PATH]
            │   └─── 1.2.3.1.1. Control URLs fetched by PhantomJS to access internal resources [HIGH-RISK PATH]

└─── 2. Exploit Application's Misuse of PhantomJS [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
    └─── 2.1. Insecure Input Handling [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
        └─── 2.1.1. Pass unsanitized user input directly to PhantomJS commands/scripts [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]
            └─── 2.1.1.1. Inject malicious JavaScript or command-line arguments [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]

Attack Tree Path: 1. Exploit PhantomJS Vulnerabilities [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Targeting inherent security flaws within the PhantomJS software itself.
  • Likelihood: Medium to High (due to PhantomJS being deprecated and potentially containing unpatched vulnerabilities).
  • Impact: Critical (Potential for Code Execution, Data Breach, Denial of Service, System Compromise).
  • Effort: Low to High (depending on the specific vulnerability and exploit availability).
  • Skill Level: Medium to High (ranging from using existing exploits to developing new ones).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High (exploits can be subtle and may not always trigger obvious alerts).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Primary Mitigation: Migrate away from PhantomJS to a supported and actively maintained alternative like Puppeteer or Playwright.
    • If migration is not immediately possible:
      • Isolate PhantomJS processes as much as possible using containerization or sandboxing.
      • Implement robust monitoring and logging of PhantomJS activity.
      • Assume compromise and implement defense-in-depth strategies.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1. Exploit Known PhantomJS Security Flaws [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Exploiting publicly disclosed vulnerabilities (CVEs) in PhantomJS.
  • Likelihood: High (PhantomJS is deprecated, known vulnerabilities are likely to exist and remain unpatched).
  • Impact: Critical (Code Execution, Data Breach, System Compromise).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Public exploits or proof-of-concepts may be available, making exploitation easier).
  • Skill Level: Medium (Understanding CVEs and adapting existing exploits).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Exploit attempts might be logged, but successful exploits can be stealthy).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Critical Action: Immediately check for and address any known CVEs affecting the version of PhantomJS in use. However, patching might not be possible due to deprecation.
    • Prioritize migration away from PhantomJS.
    • Implement strong input validation and output sanitization as a defense layer.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.1. Target Outdated PhantomJS Version [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Targeting applications using older, vulnerable versions of PhantomJS.
  • Likelihood: High (Applications might be running older versions, especially if updates are not actively managed).
  • Impact: Critical (Inherits the impact of the vulnerabilities present in the outdated version - Code Execution, Data Breach, System Compromise).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Exploits for older versions are often readily available).
  • Skill Level: Medium (Basic understanding of versioning and vulnerability databases).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Version detection might be possible, exploit detection depends on the specific vulnerability).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Immediate Action: Identify the PhantomJS version in use.
    • Urgent Action: Plan and execute migration to a supported alternative.
    • If migration is delayed, implement compensating controls like network segmentation and intrusion detection.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.1.1. Identify and Exploit Publicly Disclosed Vulnerabilities (e.g., CVEs) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Specifically targeting known CVEs in the deployed PhantomJS version.
  • Likelihood: High (Due to deprecation, known CVEs are highly likely to be present and exploitable).
  • Impact: Critical (Code Execution, Data Breach, System Compromise - direct exploitation of known flaws).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Public exploit code or detailed exploit descriptions are often available for CVEs).
  • Skill Level: Medium (Ability to find and adapt public exploits, basic understanding of vulnerability exploitation).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Intrusion detection systems might detect some exploit attempts, but targeted exploits can be designed to evade detection).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Highest Priority: This is the most critical path. Immediately research known CVEs for the PhantomJS version in use.
    • Mandatory Action: Migrate away from PhantomJS.
    • Implement robust security monitoring and incident response plans.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.2. Exploit File System Access vulnerabilities [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Manipulating file paths within PhantomJS scripts to access unauthorized files on the server.
  • Likelihood: Medium (If the application allows user-controlled file paths to be used in PhantomJS operations).
  • Impact: High (Data Breach - unauthorized access to sensitive files, Information Disclosure, potentially File Modification or Deletion).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Path traversal techniques are well-known and relatively easy to execute).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic web application security knowledge, understanding of path traversal).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (File access logging and anomaly detection on file paths can help, but subtle attacks might be missed).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Essential Mitigation: Never allow user-controlled input to directly define file paths used by PhantomJS.
    • Best Practice: Restrict PhantomJS's file system access to only necessary directories. Use secure temporary directories for PhantomJS operations.
    • Implement strict input validation and sanitization for any file paths used in PhantomJS scripts.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.2.1. Manipulate file paths in PhantomJS scripts to access unauthorized files [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Specifically using path traversal techniques (e.g., ../, absolute paths) to escape intended directories and access sensitive files.
  • Likelihood: Medium (If application code is vulnerable to path traversal in PhantomJS file operations).
  • Impact: High (Data Breach, Information Disclosure).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Path traversal is a common and well-understood attack).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic understanding of path traversal vulnerabilities).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) and file access monitoring can detect some path traversal attempts).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Primary Defense: Implement robust input validation to prevent path traversal characters in file paths.
    • Secure Coding Practice: Use secure file path handling functions provided by the programming language or framework.
    • Enforce least privilege for PhantomJS file system access.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.3. Exploit Network Access vulnerabilities [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Abusing PhantomJS's network capabilities to perform attacks like Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF).
  • Likelihood: Medium (If the application allows user-controlled URLs to be fetched by PhantomJS).
  • Impact: High (Access to internal resources, Data Breach, potentially further exploitation of internal systems).
  • Effort: Low (SSRF attacks can be relatively simple to execute if the application is vulnerable).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic web application security knowledge, understanding of SSRF).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Network traffic monitoring and anomaly detection on outbound requests can help detect SSRF).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Crucial Mitigation: Strictly control and validate URLs passed to PhantomJS for loading web pages.
    • Best Practice: Use allowlists of permitted domains or URLs that PhantomJS is allowed to access.
    • Implement network segmentation to limit the impact of SSRF attacks.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.3.1. Trigger Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Specifically crafting URLs that, when fetched by PhantomJS, target internal resources or services not intended for public access.
  • Likelihood: Medium (If application code is vulnerable to SSRF through PhantomJS URL fetching).
  • Impact: High (Access to internal APIs, databases, services; potential for further exploitation of internal infrastructure).
  • Effort: Low (Simple URL manipulation to target internal resources).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Understanding of SSRF vulnerabilities and internal network structures).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS) and monitoring of outbound traffic can detect SSRF attempts).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Primary Defense: Implement strict URL validation and sanitization. Use URL allowlists.
    • Network Security: Segment internal networks to limit the reach of SSRF attacks.
    • Regularly audit application code for SSRF vulnerabilities.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.3.1.1. Control URLs fetched by PhantomJS to access internal resources [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Directly manipulating URL parameters or input fields to control the URLs that PhantomJS fetches, specifically targeting internal or restricted resources.
  • Likelihood: Medium (If application logic directly uses user input to construct URLs for PhantomJS).
  • Impact: High (Access to sensitive internal data, configuration information, or administrative interfaces).
  • Effort: Low (Simple manipulation of URL parameters).
  • Skill Level: Low (Basic understanding of URLs and web requests).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Requires monitoring of outbound requests and correlation with user input).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Fundamental Security Principle: Never directly use user input to construct URLs without thorough validation and sanitization.
    • URL Allowlisting: Implement a strict allowlist of allowed URL schemes, domains, and paths for PhantomJS to access.
    • Use a dedicated function or library for URL construction that enforces security policies.

Attack Tree Path: 2. Exploit Application's Misuse of PhantomJS [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Exploiting vulnerabilities arising from how the application integrates and uses PhantomJS, rather than flaws in PhantomJS itself.
  • Likelihood: Medium to High (Common source of vulnerabilities in applications using external tools).
  • Impact: High (Code Execution, Data Breach, Application Compromise).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (depending on the specific misuse and exploit complexity).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic web application security knowledge).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Detection depends on the specific misuse, input validation and WAFs can help).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Secure Development Practices: Follow secure coding practices when integrating PhantomJS.
    • Code Review: Conduct thorough code reviews focusing on PhantomJS integration points.
    • Security Testing: Perform penetration testing and vulnerability scanning specifically targeting PhantomJS usage.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1. Insecure Input Handling [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Failing to properly sanitize or validate user input before using it in PhantomJS commands or scripts, leading to injection vulnerabilities.
  • Likelihood: Medium to High (Common development mistake, especially when dealing with complex external tools).
  • Impact: High (Code Execution, Data Breach, Application Compromise - injection vulnerabilities are often severe).
  • Effort: Low (Injection attacks are often relatively easy to execute if input handling is insecure).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic web application security knowledge, understanding of injection techniques).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Input validation and WAFs can detect some injection attempts, but subtle injections might bypass defenses).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Fundamental Security Control: Implement robust input validation and sanitization for all user input.
    • Principle of Least Privilege: Run PhantomJS processes with the minimum necessary privileges to limit the impact of successful injection.
    • Treat PhantomJS commands and scripts as potentially dangerous and handle user input with extreme caution.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.1. Pass unsanitized user input directly to PhantomJS commands/scripts [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Directly embedding user-provided data into PhantomJS commands or JavaScript code without any sanitization or validation.
  • Likelihood: Medium to High (Common coding error, especially when developers are not fully aware of injection risks).
  • Impact: High (Code Execution, Data Breach, Application Takeover - direct injection allows attackers to control PhantomJS behavior).
  • Effort: Low (Simple injection techniques, often just manipulating input fields).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic understanding of injection vulnerabilities).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (WAFs and input validation can detect some basic injection patterns, but sophisticated attacks might evade detection).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Absolute Rule: Never directly embed user input into PhantomJS commands or scripts without thorough sanitization and validation.
    • Parameterized Queries/Safe APIs: If possible, use parameterized queries or safe APIs provided by PhantomJS or the application framework to avoid direct string concatenation of user input.
    • Output Encoding: Even after sanitization, encode output appropriately to prevent secondary injection vulnerabilities.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.1.1. Inject malicious JavaScript or command-line arguments [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH-RISK PATH]:

  • Attack Vector: Specifically injecting malicious JavaScript code or command-line arguments into PhantomJS execution paths through unsanitized user input.
  • Likelihood: Medium to High (If application code is vulnerable to injection in PhantomJS commands).
  • Impact: High (Code Execution on the server, Data Breach, Full Application Compromise).
  • Effort: Low (JavaScript and command injection techniques are well-documented and easy to apply).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic understanding of JavaScript and command injection).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (WAFs and input validation can detect some common injection patterns, but bypasses are often possible).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Primary Prevention: Implement robust input validation and sanitization to block injection attempts.
    • Content Security Policy (CSP): If applicable, use CSP to restrict the execution of inline JavaScript and external scripts loaded by PhantomJS.
    • Regular Security Testing: Conduct penetration testing specifically targeting injection vulnerabilities in PhantomJS integration.