attack-surface.md

Attack Surface Analysis for milostosic/mtuner

Attack Surface: Memory Operation Interception Errors

• Description: Bugs in mtuner's core functionality of intercepting and handling memory allocation/deallocation calls (malloc, free, etc.). This is the most critical area.
• How mtuner Contributes: mtuner directly implements this interception; this is its primary function. Vulnerabilities here are entirely within mtuner's code.
• Example: A double-free vulnerability within mtuner's free wrapper could lead to memory corruption in the application being profiled. An integer overflow in mtuner's calculation of allocation sizes could cause an undersized allocation, leading to a heap overflow in the target application. Incorrect pointer arithmetic within mtuner's interception logic.
• Impact:
  • Denial of Service (DoS) of the target application (crash or hang).
  • Memory corruption within the target application, potentially leading to exploitable vulnerabilities within the application being profiled.
  • Bypass of application-level security mechanisms (e.g., ASLR, heap canaries) due to mtuner's interference.
• Risk Severity: Critical
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Code Review: Extremely rigorous code review of the interception logic is paramount. Focus on pointer arithmetic, size calculations, error handling, and thread safety (if applicable).
  • Fuzzing: Fuzz the target application while using mtuner. This is crucial to expose bugs in the interaction between mtuner and the application's memory management. Fuzzing mtuner in isolation is less effective.
  • Static Analysis: Use static analysis tools specifically designed to detect memory safety issues (e.g., buffer overflows, use-after-free, double-frees) in C/C++ code.
  • Unit Tests: Create a comprehensive suite of unit tests for mtuner's interception functions. Cover edge cases, error conditions, and different allocation patterns.
  • Address Sanitizer (ASan), Memory Sanitizer (MSan), UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer (UBSan): Compile and run the target application with mtuner using these sanitizers. They can detect many memory errors at runtime.
  • Disable in production: Absolutely do not use mtuner in a production environment.

Attack Surface: Internal Data Structure Vulnerabilities

• Description: Exploitable flaws in how mtuner manages its internal data structures used for tracking memory allocations. This includes potential buffer overflows, integer overflows, and logic errors in data structure manipulation.
• How mtuner Contributes: mtuner's internal data structures are entirely its own responsibility and are implemented within its codebase.
• Example: An attacker crafts a specific sequence of allocations and deallocations that causes mtuner's internal linked list or hash table to grow excessively, consuming all available memory (an algorithmic complexity attack leading to DoS). A buffer overflow in a fixed-size buffer used internally by mtuner to store allocation metadata.
• Impact:
  • Denial of Service (DoS) of the target application due to resource exhaustion (memory or CPU) caused by mtuner.
  • Potential code execution within the context of mtuner (if a buffer overflow is exploitable). This could then be leveraged to further compromise the target application.
  • Incorrect profiling results, potentially masking real memory issues or creating false positives.
• Risk Severity: High
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Code Review: Thoroughly review the code that manages mtuner's internal data structures. Pay close attention to buffer sizes, array indexing, pointer arithmetic, and the handling of dynamically allocated memory.
  • Dynamic Memory Allocation with Bounds Checking: Use dynamic memory allocation for internal data structures, and always perform rigorous bounds checking to prevent overflows and underflows.
  • Resource Limits: Implement hard limits on the maximum size of mtuner's internal data structures to prevent excessive memory consumption. This mitigates algorithmic complexity attacks.
  • Fuzzing: Fuzz the target application (while using mtuner) to try to trigger vulnerabilities in mtuner's internal data structure management.
  • Static Analysis: Use static analysis tools to identify potential buffer overflows, integer overflows, and other memory safety issues within mtuner's data structure handling code.
  • Disable in production: Do not use mtuner in a production environment.

Attack Surface: Configuration/Control Vulnerabilities

• Description: Exploitable flaws in how mtuner is configured or controlled (if such mechanisms exist), leading to unintended behavior or potential code execution.
• How mtuner Contributes: If mtuner provides any configuration options (environment variables, config files, API calls), it's responsible for their secure handling.
• Example: An environment variable used to control mtuner's behavior is not properly validated, allowing an attacker to inject malicious commands or alter mtuner's operation in a way that compromises the target application.
• Impact:
  • Potentially arbitrary code execution (if the configuration allows specifying code to be executed, even indirectly).
  • Denial of Service.
  • Modification of mtuner's behavior in unexpected and potentially dangerous ways.
• Risk Severity: High
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Strict Input Validation: Rigorously validate and sanitize any input used to configure mtuner, regardless of the source (environment variables, configuration files, API calls). Assume all input is potentially malicious.
  • Least Privilege: Avoid providing configuration options that could allow arbitrary code execution or excessive control over mtuner's behavior.
  • Secure Defaults: Use secure default settings for all configuration options. Do not rely on users to configure mtuner securely.
  • Documentation: Clearly document all configuration options and their security implications.
  • Disable in production: Do not use mtuner in a production environment.