Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
78 lines (65 loc) · 9.78 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

78 lines (65 loc) · 9.78 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for google/leveldb

Attack Surface: Excessive Key/Value Size Injection

  • Description: Attackers send overly large keys or values to LevelDB, exceeding intended limits and causing resource exhaustion.
  • LevelDB Contribution: LevelDB's design, while configurable, inherently processes byte arrays as keys and values. Without external size enforcement, LevelDB will attempt to handle excessively large data.
  • Example: An attacker floods the system with write requests containing gigabyte-sized values, rapidly consuming server memory and disk space, leading to service disruption.
  • Impact: Denial of Service (DoS) due to memory exhaustion and disk space exhaustion.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Strict Input Validation: Implement robust size limits for keys and values at the application layer before data reaches LevelDB.
    • Resource Monitoring & Alerts: Continuously monitor memory and disk usage on the LevelDB server. Set up alerts for exceeding predefined thresholds.
    • Rate Limiting: Implement rate limiting on write operations to prevent rapid resource depletion by malicious actors.

Attack Surface: Vulnerable Custom Comparator

  • Description: A custom comparator provided to LevelDB is implemented with vulnerabilities, leading to incorrect data handling or denial of service.
  • LevelDB Contribution: LevelDB allows the use of custom comparators to define key ordering. A flawed comparator directly impacts LevelDB's core functionality.
  • Example: A custom comparator contains a bug that causes an infinite loop when comparing specific keys, leading to CPU exhaustion and a complete halt of LevelDB operations during sorting or compaction. Alternatively, a comparator might have logic errors causing data corruption or incorrect retrieval.
  • Impact: Denial of Service (DoS) due to CPU exhaustion, Data Corruption, Application Logic Errors due to incorrect data ordering.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Rigorous Code Review & Testing: Subject custom comparator implementations to thorough code reviews and extensive unit and integration testing, focusing on edge cases and potential performance bottlenecks.
    • Complexity Minimization: Keep custom comparators as simple and efficient as possible. Avoid unnecessary complexity that can introduce bugs.
    • Prefer Default Comparator: Utilize LevelDB's default byte-wise comparator whenever feasible. Only implement custom comparators when absolutely necessary for specific application requirements.
    • Performance Monitoring: Closely monitor CPU usage and database performance after deploying a custom comparator to detect any performance regressions or anomalies.

Attack Surface: Insecure File System Permissions on Data Directory

  • Description: Insufficiently restrictive file system permissions on the LevelDB data directory allow unauthorized access to sensitive data files.
  • LevelDB Contribution: LevelDB persists data to files on disk within a specified directory. The security of these files is directly dependent on the underlying file system permissions.
  • Example: The LevelDB data directory is configured with world-readable permissions. An attacker gains unauthorized access to the server and directly reads SSTable files, extracting sensitive information stored within LevelDB, bypassing application-level access controls.
  • Impact: Confidentiality Breach (unauthorized access to sensitive data), Data Integrity Compromise (potential data tampering or deletion by unauthorized parties).
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Restrictive File Permissions: Implement the principle of least privilege by setting file system permissions on the LevelDB data directory to be as restrictive as possible. Ensure only the application process user and necessary administrative accounts have read and write access.
    • Operating System Access Controls: Leverage operating system-level access control mechanisms (e.g., ACLs) to further enforce access restrictions on LevelDB data files.
    • Regular Security Audits: Conduct periodic audits of file system permissions to ensure they remain securely configured and haven't been inadvertently altered.

Attack Surface: Path Traversal Vulnerability in Data Directory Configuration

  • Description: If the LevelDB data directory path is configurable, inadequate input validation can lead to path traversal attacks, allowing LevelDB to write data to unintended locations.
  • LevelDB Contribution: LevelDB uses the provided data directory path to create and manage its files. It relies on the application to provide a safe and validated path.
  • Example: An application allows configuration of the LevelDB data directory via user input. An attacker provides a malicious path like /../../../../etc/cron.d/malicious_job. If path validation is insufficient, LevelDB might attempt to create files in this system directory, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution or system compromise.
  • Impact: System Compromise (arbitrary file write leading to potential code execution), Data Corruption, Denial of Service.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Strict Path Validation & Sanitization: Implement rigorous input validation and sanitization for any user-provided data directory paths. Utilize allow-lists, canonicalization, and path traversal prevention techniques.
    • Hardcoded Data Directory Path: The most secure approach is to hardcode the LevelDB data directory path within the application configuration, eliminating user-controlled path input entirely.
    • Restricted Configuration Mechanisms: If configuration is necessary, employ highly restricted configuration mechanisms that prevent arbitrary path input, such as selecting from a predefined list of allowed directories.
    • Principle of Least Privilege (Process User): Run the LevelDB process with the minimum necessary privileges to limit the potential impact even if a path traversal vulnerability is exploited.

Attack Surface: Disk Space Exhaustion Attack via Uncontrolled Writes

  • Description: Attackers intentionally exhaust disk space by continuously writing data to LevelDB, leading to a Denial of Service.
  • LevelDB Contribution: LevelDB's persistent storage nature means uncontrolled writes directly translate to disk space consumption.
  • Example: An attacker exploits an application endpoint to repeatedly send write requests to LevelDB, filling up the disk partition until no further writes are possible, causing application failure and potentially impacting other system services.
  • Impact: Denial of Service (application and potentially system-wide instability).
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Disk Space Monitoring & Alarms: Implement comprehensive disk space monitoring for the volume hosting LevelDB data. Configure alerts to trigger when disk space usage reaches critical levels.
    • Resource Quotas & Limits: Utilize operating system or container-level resource quotas to restrict the maximum disk space that the LevelDB process can consume.
    • Data Retention Policies & Pruning: Implement data retention policies and automated data pruning mechanisms to remove older or less critical data from LevelDB, preventing indefinite disk space growth.
    • Write Rate Limiting & Throttling: Implement rate limiting and throttling mechanisms on write operations to LevelDB to control the rate of data ingestion and prevent rapid disk space exhaustion.

Attack Surface: Dependency Vulnerabilities in LevelDB Library

  • Description: Utilizing a vulnerable version of the LevelDB library exposes the application to known security vulnerabilities within LevelDB itself.
  • LevelDB Contribution: The application directly links and depends on the LevelDB library. Security flaws in LevelDB directly translate to vulnerabilities in the application.
  • Example: A publicly disclosed Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in a specific version of LevelDB. An attacker exploits this vulnerability by crafting malicious input that triggers the flaw, potentially gaining complete control over the server running the application.
  • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE), Denial of Service (DoS), Information Disclosure, depending on the nature of the vulnerability.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Proactive Dependency Management: Employ a robust dependency management system to meticulously track and manage the version of the LevelDB library used by the application.
    • Regular Updates & Patching: Maintain LevelDB library up-to-date by regularly updating to the latest stable version. Implement a rapid patching process to address newly discovered vulnerabilities promptly.
    • Vulnerability Monitoring & Alerts: Continuously monitor security advisories, vulnerability databases (e.g., CVE), and LevelDB release notes for any reported security vulnerabilities. Set up alerts to be notified of new vulnerabilities affecting the used LevelDB version.
    • Security Scanning Tools: Integrate security scanning tools into the development and deployment pipeline to automatically identify known vulnerabilities in dependencies, including LevelDB, before deployment.