Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
153 lines (134 loc) · 27.1 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

153 lines (134 loc) · 27.1 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for facebook/folly

Mitigation Strategy: Employ Static Analysis Tools (Folly-Focused)

  • Mitigation Strategy: Employ Static Analysis Tools (Folly-Focused)
  • Description:
    1. Utilize C++ Static Analyzers: Deploy static analysis tools specifically designed for C++ codebases, such as Clang Static Analyzer, Coverity, or PVS-Studio. These tools can effectively analyze code that uses Folly.
    2. Configure for Folly-Specific Patterns: If possible, configure the static analyzer with rules or checks that are particularly relevant to Folly usage patterns. This might involve custom rules or configurations that understand Folly's idioms and common usage scenarios.
    3. Focus on Memory Safety and Resource Management in Folly Code: Direct the static analysis to prioritize checks related to memory management, resource leaks, and potential null pointer dereferences within code sections that utilize Folly components, especially Folly's memory allocators and smart pointers.
    4. Integrate into CI/CD for Continuous Folly Analysis: Integrate these static analysis tools into your CI/CD pipeline to ensure that every code change, especially those involving Folly, is automatically scanned for potential vulnerabilities.
    5. Address Findings Related to Folly Usage: Specifically review and address findings generated by the static analyzer that are related to the usage of Folly libraries and components in your application.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Memory Leaks Introduced by Folly Usage (Medium Severity): Unreleased memory due to improper handling of Folly's memory management tools.
    • Buffer Overflows in Folly-Integrated Code (High Severity): Writing beyond allocated memory in code interacting with Folly data structures or APIs.
    • Use-After-Free Vulnerabilities Related to Folly (High Severity): Accessing freed memory due to incorrect lifetime management of objects managed by Folly smart pointers or allocators.
    • Null Pointer Dereferences in Folly Code Paths (Medium Severity): Accessing memory through a null pointer in code that utilizes Folly APIs.
  • Impact: Significantly reduces the risk of memory safety vulnerabilities specifically introduced through the use of Folly in the application.
  • Currently Implemented: Integrated Clang Static Analyzer into the CI pipeline, runs on each pull request. Reports are generated and linked in the PR comments.
  • Missing Implementation: Currently, only basic rules are enabled. Need to explore and enable more security-focused rules and potentially custom rules that are specifically effective in detecting issues related to Folly's usage patterns.

Mitigation Strategy: Leverage Dynamic Analysis and Fuzzing (Folly-Focused)

  • Mitigation Strategy: Leverage Dynamic Analysis and Fuzzing (Folly-Focused)
  • Description:
    1. Employ Dynamic Analysis Tools for Folly Code: Utilize dynamic analysis tools like Valgrind (Memcheck, Helgrind), AddressSanitizer (ASan), and MemorySanitizer (MSan) when testing code that uses Folly.
    2. Focus Fuzzing on Folly Components and APIs: Direct fuzzing efforts specifically towards components and APIs from the Folly library that handle external input or perform complex operations. This is especially relevant for Folly's networking (IOBuf, AsyncSocket) and data processing libraries.
    3. Fuzz Input Handling in Folly-Based Modules: Fuzz test the input handling logic of modules that are built using Folly, particularly those that process network data, user-provided data, or external files using Folly's data structures and utilities.
    4. Automate Fuzzing of Folly Integration: Integrate fuzzing into your CI/CD pipeline to continuously test the robustness of your application's Folly integration against a wide range of inputs.
    5. Analyze Fuzzing Crashes in Folly Context: When fuzzing uncovers crashes or hangs, analyze the root cause specifically in the context of Folly's code and your application's usage of Folly. Identify if the issue originates from a vulnerability in Folly usage or potentially in Folly itself.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Memory Corruption Vulnerabilities in Folly Usage (High Severity): Buffer overflows, use-after-free, heap overflows triggered during runtime execution of code using Folly.
    • Unexpected Behavior and Crashes in Folly Integration (Medium to High Severity): Uncovers edge cases and unexpected inputs that can lead to application instability or denial of service specifically related to how Folly is integrated.
    • Data Races and Concurrency Issues in Folly-Based Concurrency (Medium to High Severity): Detected by tools like Valgrind Helgrind when fuzzing concurrent code that utilizes Folly's concurrency primitives.
  • Impact: Significantly reduces the risk of runtime memory errors and uncovers vulnerabilities specifically related to the integration and usage of Folly components within the application. Fuzzing is particularly effective for finding input validation vulnerabilities in Folly-based modules.
  • Currently Implemented: Unit tests are run with AddressSanitizer enabled in the development environment.
  • Missing Implementation: Fuzzing is not currently implemented, especially focused on Folly components. Dynamic analysis is not integrated into the CI pipeline for all test suites. Need to set up a dedicated fuzzing environment targeting Folly APIs and integrate ASan/MSan into the CI pipeline for more comprehensive testing of Folly integration.

Mitigation Strategy: Strict Code Reviews Focusing on Folly Usage

  • Mitigation Strategy: Strict Code Reviews Focusing on Folly Usage
  • Description:
    1. Train Developers on Folly Security Best Practices: Conduct training sessions specifically focused on secure coding practices when using the Folly library. Highlight common security pitfalls and secure usage patterns for Folly components, particularly in memory management, networking, and concurrency.
    2. Establish Folly-Specific Review Checklist: Create a code review checklist that includes specific items related to secure Folly usage. This checklist should cover aspects like proper memory management with Folly smart pointers, safe usage of Folly data structures, and secure configuration of Folly networking and concurrency components.
    3. Mandatory Code Reviews for Folly-Related Code: Enforce mandatory code reviews for all code changes that involve the Folly library. Ensure that reviewers are trained and aware of the Folly-specific security checklist.
    4. Focus on Memory Management and Resource Handling with Folly: During code reviews, pay close attention to how developers are using Folly's memory management features (smart pointers, allocators) and resource handling mechanisms. Verify proper resource cleanup and prevent potential leaks or double-frees in Folly-related code.
    5. Peer Review and Security Champion Involvement for Folly Code: Encourage peer reviews and consider involving a designated "security champion" with expertise in Folly and C++ security in reviews of critical components that heavily utilize Folly.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Memory Management Errors Due to Folly Misuse (High Severity): Manual memory management mistakes when using Folly, leading to leaks, double-frees, use-after-free.
    • Logic Errors in Folly API Usage (Medium Severity): Incorrect or insecure use of Folly APIs leading to unexpected behavior or vulnerabilities.
    • Configuration Vulnerabilities in Folly Components (Medium Severity): Misconfiguration of Folly components, especially networking and concurrency settings, leading to security weaknesses.
  • Impact: Moderately reduces the risk of vulnerabilities by catching coding errors and design flaws specifically related to Folly usage before they reach production. Effectiveness depends on the rigor of the review process and reviewer expertise in Folly security.
  • Currently Implemented: Code reviews are mandatory for all code changes.
  • Missing Implementation: No specific Folly-focused checklist exists for code reviews. Developers need more targeted training on Folly security best practices and a more structured approach to reviewing Folly-related code, guided by a Folly-specific checklist.

Mitigation Strategy: Utilize Folly's Smart Pointers and Resource Management Utilities

  • Mitigation Strategy: Utilize Folly's Smart Pointers and Resource Management Utilities
  • Description:
    1. Prioritize Folly Smart Pointers: Establish coding guidelines that strongly encourage the use of Folly's smart pointers (folly::SharedPtr, folly::ObserverPtr, folly::UniquePtr) as the primary method for managing dynamically allocated memory within the project, especially when working with Folly components.
    2. Educate on Folly Smart Pointer Types and Best Practices: Ensure developers are thoroughly educated on the different types of Folly smart pointers, their specific use cases, and best practices for their effective and secure utilization. Emphasize how they mitigate memory management errors compared to raw pointers.
    3. Leverage Folly Resource Management Utilities: Actively utilize Folly's resource management utilities like folly::AutoPtr and RAII (Resource Acquisition Is Initialization) principles to ensure automatic resource release in code interacting with Folly libraries.
    4. Discourage Raw Pointer Usage in Folly Context: Actively discourage the use of raw pointers and manual memory management (new and delete directly) in code that integrates with Folly, unless there is a very specific and well-justified reason.
    5. Enforce Smart Pointer Usage in Folly-Related Code Reviews: During code reviews, strictly enforce the use of Folly smart pointers and resource management utilities in code that uses Folly. Flag and require justification for any code using raw pointers for dynamic memory management in Folly-integrated sections.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Memory Leaks Due to Manual Memory Management with Folly (Medium Severity): Failure to release allocated memory when using raw pointers alongside Folly components.
    • Dangling Pointers in Folly-Integrated Code (High Severity): Accessing memory that has already been freed, often due to improper manual memory management in Folly-using code.
    • Double-Free Vulnerabilities in Folly Context (High Severity): Freeing the same memory block twice, potentially caused by errors in manual memory management when interacting with Folly's memory structures.
  • Impact: Moderately to Significantly reduces the risk of memory management errors specifically in code that utilizes Folly, by automating memory cleanup and reducing the reliance on error-prone manual memory management.
  • Currently Implemented: Smart pointers are generally used in new code, but there's no strict enforcement or comprehensive guideline specifically for Folly usage.
  • Missing Implementation: Need to create and enforce coding guidelines that mandate Folly smart pointer usage in all Folly-related code. Legacy code interacting with Folly needs to be refactored to use smart pointers where appropriate. More developer training specifically on best practices for Folly smart pointer usage is needed.

Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Update Folly Version

  • Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Update Folly Version
  • Description:
    1. Monitor Folly Release Channels: Actively monitor Folly's release announcements through official channels (e.g., GitHub releases, Facebook Open Source blog, Folly mailing lists) to stay informed about new versions, bug fixes, and security updates.
    2. Establish a Regular Folly Update Schedule: Create and adhere to a schedule for regularly updating the Folly library in your project. Aim for updates to new stable releases at least quarterly, or more frequently if critical security patches are released by the Folly team.
    3. Thoroughly Test After Folly Updates: After each Folly update, conduct comprehensive testing of your application to ensure compatibility with the new Folly version and to identify any regressions or unexpected behavior introduced by the update. Run unit tests, integration tests, and system tests, paying special attention to components that heavily rely on Folly.
    4. Prioritize Security Patch Updates for Folly: If a security vulnerability is publicly announced in Folly, immediately prioritize updating to the patched version provided by the Folly maintainers. Treat Folly security updates as critical and deploy them promptly.
    5. Utilize Dependency Management for Folly Updates: Employ a dependency management tool (e.g., CMake FetchContent, Conan, vcpkg) to manage Folly and its dependencies. This simplifies the process of updating Folly versions and ensures consistent dependency management across the project.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Known Security Vulnerabilities in Folly (High Severity): Exploits targeting publicly disclosed vulnerabilities that are fixed in newer versions of Folly.
    • Bugs and Instability in Older Folly Versions (Medium Severity): Older versions of Folly may contain bugs that can lead to crashes, unexpected behavior, or subtle vulnerabilities that are resolved in later releases.
  • Impact: Significantly reduces the risk of exploitation of known vulnerabilities present in older versions of Folly and benefits from bug fixes, performance improvements, and potentially new security features included in newer Folly releases.
  • Currently Implemented: Folly version is updated occasionally, but there's no regular schedule or automated process for updates.
  • Missing Implementation: Need to establish a regular and enforced Folly update schedule and integrate it into the project's standard maintenance procedures. Automate dependency updates using a dependency management tool to streamline the process.

Mitigation Strategy: Implement Rate Limiting and Resource Quotas (Folly Networking Components)

  • Mitigation Strategy: Implement Rate Limiting and Resource Quotas (Folly Networking Components)
  • Description:
    1. Identify Folly Networking Entry Points: Pinpoint all network entry points in your application that are implemented using Folly's networking components (e.g., AsyncServerSocket, AsyncSocket, services built on top of Folly's networking stack).
    2. Apply Rate Limiting to Folly Network Services: Implement rate limiting mechanisms specifically at these Folly-based network entry points. Restrict the number of requests from a single source (IP address, user, etc.) within a defined time window. Leverage Folly's concurrency primitives or integrate external rate limiting libraries compatible with Folly's asynchronous nature.
    3. Set Resource Quotas for Folly Network Connections: Configure resource quotas that are relevant to Folly network connections, such as maximum concurrent connections handled by Folly's AsyncServerSocket, connection timeouts for AsyncSocket, and buffer size limits for IOBuf usage. Prevent unbounded resource consumption by Folly's networking components.
    4. Configure Timeouts for Folly Network Operations: Set appropriate timeouts for all network operations performed using Folly's networking APIs (connection establishment, data transmission/reception, etc.). This prevents indefinite hangs and resource exhaustion in scenarios involving slow clients, network issues, or malicious attempts to stall Folly-based network services.
    5. Monitor Network Traffic to Folly Services: Implement monitoring and alerting systems to track network traffic and connection metrics specifically for services built using Folly's networking. Detect anomalies, excessive traffic, and potential DoS attacks targeting Folly-based network endpoints. Alert on exceeding rate limits or resource quotas configured for Folly networking.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Denial of Service (DoS) Attacks Targeting Folly Networking (High Severity): Prevent malicious actors from overwhelming application services built with Folly networking components with excessive network requests, leading to service unavailability.
    • Resource Exhaustion in Folly Network Services (Medium Severity): Prevent legitimate users or misbehaving clients from consuming excessive resources (connections, bandwidth, memory buffers managed by Folly) in Folly-based network services, impacting service availability for other users.
  • Impact: Significantly reduces the risk of DoS attacks specifically targeting network services built using Folly's networking components by effectively limiting the impact of malicious or excessive traffic.
  • Currently Implemented: Basic connection timeouts are configured for network sockets, potentially including those using Folly.
  • Missing Implementation: Rate limiting and resource quotas are not specifically implemented at the application level for services built using Folly's networking. Need to implement request rate limiting and connection limits tailored for network services utilizing Folly's AsyncServerSocket and related components.

Mitigation Strategy: Careful Use of Folly's Concurrency Primitives

  • Mitigation Strategy: Careful Use of Folly's Concurrency Primitives
  • Description:
    1. Deep Understanding of Folly Concurrency: Ensure developers possess a thorough and in-depth understanding of Folly's concurrency primitives (Executor, Future, Promise, Baton, ConcurrentQueue, etc.) and their potential security implications and common pitfalls. Provide comprehensive training and documentation specifically on secure and efficient usage of Folly concurrency.
    2. Avoid Unbounded Queues in Folly Concurrency: When utilizing Folly executors and futures, strictly avoid creating unbounded queues that can grow indefinitely. Unbounded queues can lead to memory exhaustion and DoS under heavy load. Implement bounded queues or backpressure mechanisms when using Folly's concurrency features to manage resource consumption.
    3. Implement Robust Synchronization with Folly Tools: Employ appropriate synchronization mechanisms (mutexes, atomics, folly::Baton, folly::Synchronized, etc.) provided by Folly to protect shared resources accessed by concurrent tasks managed by Folly executors or futures. Prevent race conditions, data corruption, and deadlocks in concurrent code using Folly.
    4. Limit Thread/Process Creation with Folly Executors: Carefully manage thread and process creation when using Folly's Executor framework. Avoid excessive thread or process creation, which can lead to resource exhaustion and performance degradation, potentially causing DoS. Utilize thread pools and process pools effectively through Folly's Executor framework and configure them with appropriate limits.
    5. Rigorous Code Reviews for Folly Concurrency: Conduct particularly rigorous code reviews for all concurrency-related code that utilizes Folly's concurrency primitives. Focus on identifying potential race conditions, deadlocks, improper synchronization, and unbounded resource usage in Folly-based concurrent code.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Race Conditions in Folly Concurrent Code (High Severity): Unpredictable behavior and potential data corruption due to unsynchronized access to shared resources in code using Folly concurrency.
    • Deadlocks in Folly Concurrency (High Severity): Application hangs and service unavailability due to deadlocks arising from improper synchronization in Folly-based concurrent operations.
    • Resource Exhaustion (DoS) via Folly Concurrency Misuse (Medium Severity): Excessive thread/process creation or unbounded queues in Folly concurrency leading to memory or CPU exhaustion and DoS.
    • Unintended Behavior in Folly Concurrent Logic (Medium Severity): Logic errors and unexpected application behavior stemming from incorrect or insecure implementation of concurrency using Folly primitives.
  • Impact: Moderately to Significantly reduces the risk of concurrency-related vulnerabilities and performance issues by promoting safe, efficient, and secure utilization of Folly's concurrency primitives.
  • Currently Implemented: Folly's concurrency primitives are used, but concurrency patterns are not consistently reviewed for security and efficiency, especially in relation to Folly-specific best practices.
  • Missing Implementation: Need to establish detailed coding guidelines for secure concurrency practices specifically when using Folly. Implement code review checklists that specifically address concurrency aspects in Folly-based code. Consider integrating static analysis tools that are capable of detecting concurrency issues, especially those related to Folly's concurrency primitives.

Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Scan Folly's Dependencies for Vulnerabilities

  • Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Scan Folly's Dependencies for Vulnerabilities
  • Description:
    1. Select a Dependency Scanning Tool for Folly Dependencies: Choose a Software Composition Analysis (SCA) tool or dependency scanning tool (e.g., OWASP Dependency-Check, Snyk, GitHub Dependency Scanning) that is capable of effectively scanning C++ project dependencies, including those of Folly.
    2. Integrate Dependency Scanning into CI/CD for Folly: Integrate the chosen tool into your CI/CD pipeline to automatically scan Folly's dependencies (both direct and transitive) on every code commit, pull request, or at least on a regular schedule.
    3. Configure Vulnerability Database for Folly Dependency Scan: Configure the dependency scanning tool to utilize up-to-date and comprehensive vulnerability databases (e.g., National Vulnerability Database - NVD, OSV) to ensure accurate detection of known vulnerabilities in Folly's dependencies.
    4. Review and Remediate Vulnerabilities in Folly Dependencies: Regularly review the vulnerability reports generated by the dependency scanner specifically for Folly's dependencies. Prioritize fixing high and critical severity vulnerabilities identified in these dependencies.
    5. Automated Updates of Vulnerable Folly Dependencies (with Caution): Consider automating the process of updating vulnerable Folly dependencies to patched versions, but implement this with caution. Thoroughly test dependency updates in a staging environment before deploying to production to avoid introducing regressions or compatibility issues with Folly itself.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Vulnerabilities in Folly's Dependencies (High Severity): Exploits targeting known vulnerabilities present in libraries that Folly directly or indirectly depends upon.
    • Supply Chain Attacks via Folly Dependencies (Medium to High Severity): Risk of compromised dependencies of Folly introducing malicious code or vulnerabilities into your application indirectly through Folly.
  • Impact: Significantly reduces the risk of vulnerabilities arising from Folly's dependency chain by proactively identifying and addressing known security issues in libraries that Folly relies on.
  • Currently Implemented: No dependency scanning is currently implemented specifically for Folly or its dependencies.
  • Missing Implementation: Need to integrate a dependency scanning tool into the CI pipeline to regularly scan Folly's dependencies for vulnerabilities. Establish a clear process for reviewing, prioritizing, and remediating identified vulnerabilities in Folly's dependency tree.

Mitigation Strategy: Follow Secure Coding Practices When Using Folly APIs

  • Mitigation Strategy: Follow Secure Coding Practices When Using Folly APIs
  • Description:
    1. Develop Folly-Specific Secure Coding Guidelines: Create detailed and specific secure coding guidelines that directly address common security pitfalls and best practices when utilizing various Folly APIs and components. These guidelines should include concrete examples of both safe and unsafe usage patterns for Folly.
    2. Provide Developer Training on Folly Security: Deliver targeted training to developers specifically on these Folly-focused secure coding guidelines and best practices. Ensure developers understand the security implications of different Folly features and configurations and how to use Folly APIs securely.
    3. Create Secure Code Examples and Templates for Folly Usage: Develop and provide secure code examples and templates for frequently used Folly usage scenarios. These examples should serve as practical guides for developers and promote consistent secure coding practices when working with Folly.
    4. Customize Static Analysis Rules for Folly Security: Customize static analysis rules to specifically detect insecure usage patterns of Folly APIs, based on the developed secure coding guidelines. This can involve creating custom rules or configurations for static analysis tools that are tailored to Folly's API conventions and potential security weaknesses.
    5. Regularly Review and Update Folly Secure Coding Guidelines: Establish a process for regularly reviewing and updating the Folly-specific secure coding guidelines. Keep them current with new vulnerabilities, emerging best practices, and evolving security recommendations related to Folly and C++ development in general.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Misuse of Folly APIs Leading to Vulnerabilities (Medium to High Severity): Incorrect or insecure usage of Folly APIs by developers, potentially leading to vulnerabilities such as memory errors, DoS conditions, or injection flaws.
    • Logic Errors Due to Lack of Folly API Security Understanding (Medium Severity): Coding errors and security weaknesses stemming from a lack of sufficient understanding of Folly's API behavior and its security implications by development teams.
  • Impact: Moderately reduces the risk of vulnerabilities by proactively guiding developers towards secure usage of Folly APIs and preventing common coding mistakes that could introduce security weaknesses when integrating with Folly.
  • Currently Implemented: General secure coding practices are encouraged, but no specific, documented Folly-specific guidelines exist.
  • Missing Implementation: Need to formally develop and document comprehensive Folly-specific secure coding guidelines. Provide targeted developer training on these guidelines and actively integrate them into code reviews and static analysis processes to ensure consistent secure Folly usage across the project.