Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
185 lines (136 loc) · 14.8 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

185 lines (136 loc) · 14.8 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for nlohmann/json

Mitigation Strategy: Schema Validation

  • Description:

    1. Choose a JSON Schema validation library: Select a library compatible with your project's language to validate JSON against schemas.
    2. Define JSON Schemas: Create schemas that define the expected structure, data types, and constraints for all JSON inputs your application processes.
    3. Validate Incoming JSON: Before parsing with nlohmann/json, validate the raw JSON string against the defined schema using the chosen library.
    4. Reject Invalid JSON: If validation fails, reject the JSON payload and return an error.
    5. Parse Valid JSON: If validation succeeds, proceed to parse the JSON string using nlohmann/json.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Malformed JSON Injection (Medium Severity): Prevents processing of syntactically invalid JSON.
    • Data Type Mismatch Vulnerabilities (Medium Severity): Enforces expected data types within JSON payloads.
    • Unexpected Structure Exploits (Medium Severity): Restricts JSON structure to the defined schema, preventing unexpected elements.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Complex Structures (Low to Medium Severity): Limits allowed JSON complexity through schema constraints.

  • Impact:

    • Malformed JSON Injection: High reduction.
    • Data Type Mismatch Vulnerabilities: High reduction.
    • Unexpected Structure Exploits: High reduction.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Complex Structures: Medium reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented in API endpoints for user registration and login, but basic schema validation only.

  • Missing Implementation: Missing in API endpoints for data updates, reporting, admin interfaces, and internal JSON configuration files. Needs expansion to include detailed data type, format, and range checks across all JSON input points.

Mitigation Strategy: Data Type and Range Checks (Post-Parsing)

  • Description:

    1. Parse JSON with nlohmann/json: Parse the incoming JSON payload using nlohmann/json.
    2. Access and Validate JSON Data: Access data elements from the parsed nlohmann::json object.
    3. Perform Data Type Checks: Use nlohmann/json functions (is_string(), is_number(), etc.) to verify expected data types.
    4. Validate Data Ranges and Formats: Check numeric ranges, string lengths, and formats (e.g., using regex for strings) of the extracted JSON data.
    5. Handle Validation Failures: If any data validation fails, reject the request or input and log the failure.
    6. Process Validated Data: Proceed with application logic only if all data validations pass.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Integer Overflow/Underflow (Medium to High Severity): Prevents issues from out-of-range numeric values in JSON.
    • Buffer Overflow via String Length (Medium Severity): Mitigates risks from excessively long strings in JSON.
    • Logic Errors due to Unexpected Data (Medium Severity): Reduces errors from unexpected data values within valid JSON structures.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Large Strings/Arrays (Low to Medium Severity): Limits impact of excessively large data within JSON.

  • Impact:

    • Integer Overflow/Underflow: High reduction.
    • Buffer Overflow via String Length: High reduction.
    • Logic Errors due to Unexpected Data: High reduction.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Large Strings/Arrays: Medium reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented in some data processing modules with basic type checks, but range and format validation are inconsistent.

  • Missing Implementation: Missing in many data processing modules, especially for complex JSON structures and user-provided data. Range checks for numbers and format validation for strings are largely absent. Needs consistent and thorough data validation after JSON parsing.

Mitigation Strategy: Reject Malformed JSON (Strict Parsing)

  • Description:

    1. Use nlohmann/json Strict Parsing: Rely on nlohmann/json's default strict parsing to enforce JSON syntax.
    2. Implement Exception Handling for Parsing: Use try-catch blocks around nlohmann::json::parse() to catch parsing errors.
    3. Catch Parsing Exceptions: Specifically catch nlohmann::json::parse_error exceptions.
    4. Handle Parsing Errors Securely: Log parsing errors for debugging, return generic error responses to clients, and avoid exposing detailed error information.
    5. Stop Processing on Parsing Error: Immediately reject and stop processing any JSON payload that fails parsing.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Bypass of Parsing Logic (Medium Severity): Prevents attackers from bypassing validation with slightly malformed JSON.
    • Unexpected Behavior due to Parsing Ambiguity (Medium Severity): Avoids issues from ambiguous interpretation of malformed JSON.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Parser Exploits (Low Severity): Reduces attack surface related to parser vulnerabilities by enforcing strictness.

  • Impact:

    • Bypass of Parsing Logic: High reduction.
    • Unexpected Behavior due to Parsing Ambiguity: High reduction.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Parser Exploits: Low reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Largely implemented by default due to nlohmann/json's strictness and exception handling in API endpoints.

  • Missing Implementation: Review all JSON parsing code paths to ensure consistent exception handling and no relaxed parsing options are enabled. Verify secure error handling for parsing failures across the application.

Mitigation Strategy: Payload Size Limits for JSON

  • Description:

    1. Determine JSON Payload Size Limits: Define maximum acceptable sizes for incoming JSON payloads based on application needs and resources.
    2. Check Payload Size Before Parsing: Implement a check on the raw size of the incoming JSON data before attempting to parse it with nlohmann/json.
    3. Reject Oversized JSON Payloads: If the JSON payload exceeds the size limit, reject the request with an error (e.g., 413 Payload Too Large).
    4. Configure Web Server Limits (Optional): Set size limits at the web server level as an initial defense layer for JSON payloads.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Large JSON Payloads (High Severity): Prevents resource exhaustion from processing extremely large JSON payloads.
    • Resource Exhaustion (Memory/CPU) due to Large JSON (High Severity): Controls resource consumption during JSON parsing and processing.

  • Impact:

    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Large JSON Payloads: High reduction.
    • Resource Exhaustion (Memory/CPU) due to Large JSON: High reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented with web server limits, but application-level JSON payload size limits are not consistently enforced.

  • Missing Implementation: Need explicit payload size checks within the application code for all API endpoints handling JSON input. Limits should be configurable and appropriately set for JSON data.

Mitigation Strategy: Parsing Timeout for JSON

  • Description:

    1. Identify JSON Parsing Operations: Locate all code sections where nlohmann/json is used for parsing.
    2. Implement Timeout for JSON Parsing: Introduce a timeout mechanism specifically for JSON parsing operations, especially for untrusted input.
    3. Set JSON Parsing Timeout Value: Determine a reasonable timeout duration for JSON parsing, balancing legitimate complex JSON with DoS prevention.
    4. Handle JSON Parsing Timeout: If parsing exceeds the timeout, terminate the process, log the timeout, and return an error response.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Complex JSON (Medium to High Severity): Prevents DoS by limiting parsing time for excessively complex JSON.
    • Algorithmic Complexity Exploits in JSON Parsing (Medium Severity): Mitigates exploits that leverage parser complexity to cause performance degradation.

  • Impact:

    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Complex JSON: Medium to High reduction.
    • Algorithmic Complexity Exploits in JSON Parsing: Medium reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Not currently implemented. JSON parsing is mostly synchronous without timeouts.

  • Missing Implementation: Parsing timeouts need to be implemented for all JSON parsing, especially in API endpoints handling user JSON. Requires refactoring to incorporate timeout mechanisms for JSON parsing.

Mitigation Strategy: Context-Aware Output Encoding for JSON Data

  • Description:

    1. Identify JSON Data Output Contexts: Determine where data extracted from JSON is used in output (HTML, SQL, command-line, logs, etc.).
    2. Choose Context-Specific Encoding/Escaping: Select appropriate encoding for each output context to prevent injection vulnerabilities when using JSON data.
      • HTML Encoding for JSON in Web Pages: Encode JSON data for HTML to prevent XSS.
      • SQL Parameterization for JSON in SQL Queries: Use parameterized queries to prevent SQL injection when using JSON data in queries.
      • Command-Line Escaping for JSON in Commands: Escape JSON data for command-line use to prevent command injection.
      • Sanitization for JSON in Logs: Sanitize or redact sensitive data from JSON before logging.
    3. Implement Encoding Functions: Implement or use libraries for context-specific encoding.
    4. Apply Encoding Before Outputting JSON Data: Consistently apply encoding based on the output context for all data derived from JSON.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (High Severity): Prevents XSS when displaying JSON data in web pages.
    • SQL Injection (High Severity): Prevents SQL injection when using JSON data in database queries.
    • Command Injection (High Severity): Prevents command injection when using JSON data in system commands.
    • Information Leakage in Logs (Low to Medium Severity): Reduces risk of exposing sensitive JSON data in logs.

  • Impact:

    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): High reduction.
    • SQL Injection: High reduction.
    • Command Injection: High reduction.
    • Information Leakage in Logs: Medium reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented with HTML encoding in some web app parts and SQL parameterization, but inconsistent application-wide. Command-line escaping and log sanitization for JSON data are not systematically implemented.

  • Missing Implementation: Need consistent context-aware output encoding across the application for all JSON data usage. Requires review of all output points, systematic implementation of encoding for each context, and coding guidelines.

Mitigation Strategy: Keep nlohmann/json Library Updated

  • Description:

    1. Monitor nlohmann/json Releases: Track releases, security advisories, and bug fixes for nlohmann/json on its GitHub repository.
    2. Update to Latest Stable nlohmann/json: Regularly update your project to the newest stable version of nlohmann/json.
    3. Test After nlohmann/json Update: Thoroughly test your application after updating nlohmann/json to ensure compatibility and no regressions.
    4. Regular Dependency Review: Periodically review all dependencies, including nlohmann/json, for updates and vulnerabilities.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Vulnerabilities in nlohmann/json (Severity Varies): Patches known vulnerabilities in the nlohmann/json library itself.

  • Impact:

    • Vulnerabilities in nlohmann/json: Medium to High reduction (depending on the vulnerability).

  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented with periodic dependency updates, but not on a strict schedule and monitoring is not automated.

  • Missing Implementation: Need a proactive and systematic dependency update process, including automated checks, scheduled updates for nlohmann/json, and integration with CI/CD for testing updates.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Error Handling and Logging for JSON Parsing

  • Description:

    1. Catch nlohmann/json Parsing Exceptions: Use try-catch blocks to handle exceptions from nlohmann/json parsing.
    2. Handle JSON Parsing Errors Gracefully: Handle parsing errors without crashing the application or exposing sensitive details to users.
    3. Log JSON Parsing Error Details Securely: Log error details (timestamp, error type, source IP) for debugging and monitoring, but sanitize or redact sensitive data from the JSON payload in logs.
    4. Return Generic Error Responses for JSON Issues: Provide generic error messages to clients for JSON-related errors, without revealing internal details.
    5. Secure JSON Parsing Log Storage: Ensure secure storage and access control for logs containing JSON parsing error information.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Information Disclosure via JSON Parsing Error Messages (Low to Medium Severity): Prevents verbose error messages from revealing internal details or sensitive JSON data.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via JSON Parsing Error Flooding (Low Severity): Helps manage log volume from JSON parsing errors.
    • Security Monitoring Gaps Related to JSON Parsing (Medium Severity): Ensures sufficient logging for monitoring and incident response related to JSON processing issues.

  • Impact:

    • Information Disclosure via JSON Parsing Error Messages: High reduction.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via JSON Parsing Error Flooding: Low reduction.
    • Security Monitoring Gaps Related to JSON Parsing: High reduction.

  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented with exception handling in some areas, but error responses and logging practices for JSON parsing errors are inconsistent.

  • Missing Implementation: Need standardized error handling and secure logging specifically for JSON parsing across the application. Requires review of error responses, consistent and secure logging of JSON parsing events, and developer guidelines for secure JSON error handling.