Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
152 lines (127 loc) · 172 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

152 lines (127 loc) · 172 KB

Okay, here's the deep security analysis of SRS, based on the provided design review and the GitHub repository:

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

  • Objective: To conduct a thorough security analysis of the key components of the SRS (Simple Realtime Server) project, identifying potential vulnerabilities, assessing their impact, and recommending mitigation strategies. The analysis will focus on the core server functionality, including stream ingestion, processing, and delivery, as well as supporting features like the HTTP API and configuration management.
  • Scope:
    • Core SRS server components (RTMP Handler, WebRTC Handler, Stream Multiplexer, HTTP API Handler, HLS Handler, HTTP-FLV Handler).
    • Configuration mechanisms.
    • Authentication and authorization mechanisms.
    • Data flow and handling of stream data.
    • Dependencies on third-party libraries (high-level review, not deep dives into each library).
    • Deployment model (Docker-based, as specified).
    • Build process (basic review).
  • Methodology:
    • Code Review (Static Analysis): Examining the SRS codebase (C++ primarily) to identify potential coding errors, insecure practices, and vulnerabilities. This will be informed by the C4 diagrams and component descriptions.
    • Architecture Review: Analyzing the system architecture and data flow to identify potential weaknesses in design and implementation.
    • Dependency Analysis: Identifying key third-party libraries and known vulnerabilities associated with them (using publicly available information).
    • Threat Modeling: Identifying potential threats based on the system's functionality and deployment environment.
    • Configuration Review: Examining default configuration files and options to identify potential security misconfigurations.
    • Documentation Review: Reviewing available documentation to understand intended security features and best practices.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Here's a breakdown of the security implications of each key component, inferred from the codebase structure and documentation:

  • RTMP Handler:

    • Functionality: Handles RTMP connections, demultiplexes RTMP data, and handles RTMP control messages.
    • Security Implications:
      • RTMP Injection: Vulnerable to attacks where malicious RTMP messages are injected to disrupt service or potentially execute arbitrary code. This is a critical area for input validation. The complex structure of RTMP makes it prone to parsing errors.
      • Resource Exhaustion: Malicious clients could open many RTMP connections or send large amounts of data to overwhelm the server.
      • Authentication Bypass: If authentication is misconfigured or weak, attackers could publish unauthorized streams.
      • Information Disclosure: RTMP metadata or handshake messages could leak information about the server or stream.
    • Specific Code Areas (Inferred): Look for functions handling AMF parsing, message decoding, and connection management. Focus on error handling and boundary checks.

  • WebRTC Handler:

    • Functionality: Handles WebRTC signaling and media data, including ICE, DTLS, and SRTP.
    • Security Implications:
      • DTLS/SRTP Implementation Vulnerabilities: Errors in the implementation of DTLS (for key exchange and data encryption) or SRTP (for media encryption) could lead to eavesdropping or data manipulation. This relies heavily on the underlying library (likely OpenSSL or a similar library).
      • ICE Candidate Handling: Improper handling of ICE candidates could lead to network reconnaissance or denial-of-service attacks.
      • Signaling Attacks: Malicious signaling messages could disrupt WebRTC sessions or cause the server to crash.
      • Resource Exhaustion: Similar to RTMP, malicious clients could consume excessive resources.
    • Specific Code Areas (Inferred): Examine functions related to DTLS handshake, SRTP encryption/decryption, ICE candidate processing, and SDP parsing.

  • Stream Multiplexer:

    • Functionality: Routes and manages stream data between ingest and output handlers.
    • Security Implications:
      • Data Corruption: Errors in the multiplexer could lead to corrupted stream data. While not a direct security vulnerability, it impacts availability.
      • Logic Errors: Flaws in the routing logic could lead to streams being sent to the wrong destinations or not being delivered at all.
      • Memory Management Issues: If the multiplexer handles buffers improperly, it could be vulnerable to buffer overflows or memory leaks.
    • Specific Code Areas (Inferred): Focus on functions that manage stream buffers, routing tables, and data copying.

  • API Handler (HTTP API):

    • Functionality: Processes HTTP API requests for managing and monitoring SRS.
    • Security Implications:
      • Authentication and Authorization: The API must have strong authentication and authorization to prevent unauthorized access to server controls. This is a critical area.
      • Command Injection: If API parameters are not properly validated, attackers could inject commands to be executed on the server.
      • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): If the API returns user-supplied data without proper encoding, it could be vulnerable to XSS attacks (if a web interface is built on top of the API).
      • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF): If the API does not implement CSRF protection, attackers could trick users into performing actions they did not intend.
      • Information Disclosure: The API could leak sensitive information about the server or its configuration.
      • Rate Limiting: The API should implement rate limiting to prevent brute-force attacks and denial-of-service.
    • Specific Code Areas (Inferred): Examine functions that handle HTTP requests, parse parameters, and interact with the server's internal state.

  • HLS Handler:

    • Functionality: Generates HLS playlists (.m3u8) and segments (.ts).
    • Security Implications:
      • Path Traversal: If the handler does not properly sanitize file paths, attackers could potentially write files to arbitrary locations on the server.
      • Resource Exhaustion: Generating HLS segments can be resource-intensive. Attackers could trigger excessive segment generation to cause a denial-of-service.
      • Manifest Manipulation: If attackers can modify the HLS playlist, they could redirect clients to malicious streams or cause playback errors.
    • Specific Code Areas (Inferred): Focus on functions that handle file I/O, generate playlist files, and create segment files.

  • HTTP-FLV Handler:

    • Functionality: Serves HTTP-FLV streams.
    • Security Implications:
      • Resource Exhaustion: Similar to other handlers, malicious clients could consume excessive resources.
      • FLV Parsing Vulnerabilities: If the handler has vulnerabilities in parsing FLV data, it could be exploited to cause a crash or potentially execute arbitrary code.
    • Specific Code Areas (Inferred): Examine functions that handle HTTP requests and send FLV data to clients.

  • Configuration Mechanisms:

    • Security Implications:
      • Insecure Defaults: Default configurations should prioritize security. If defaults are insecure, many users may deploy vulnerable servers.
      • Lack of Input Validation: The configuration parser should validate all configuration options to prevent unexpected behavior or vulnerabilities.
      • Clear Text Storage of Secrets: Sensitive information like passwords or API keys should never be stored in plain text in configuration files.
    • Specific Code Areas: Configuration parsing logic.

  • Authentication and Authorization:

    • Security Implications:
      • Weak Password Policies: If password-based authentication is used, strong password policies should be enforced.
      • Brute-Force Attacks: The authentication mechanism should be resistant to brute-force attacks (e.g., through rate limiting or account lockout).
      • Lack of Session Management: Proper session management is crucial to prevent session hijacking.
    • Specific Code Areas: Authentication and authorization logic, session management.

  • Data Flow and Handling of Stream Data:

    • Security Implications:
      • Data in Transit: Stream data should be encrypted in transit using TLS/DTLS to protect against eavesdropping.
      • Data at Rest: If stream data is stored (e.g., for DVR), it should be encrypted at rest to protect against unauthorized access.
    • Specific Code Areas: Network communication, data storage.

  • Dependencies:

    • Security Implications:
      • Vulnerable Libraries: SRS relies on third-party libraries (e.g., OpenSSL, libsrt, JSON libraries). Vulnerabilities in these libraries can directly impact the security of SRS. Regular updates and dependency management are critical.
    • Specific Libraries: OpenSSL (TLS/DTLS), libsrt (SRT), any JSON parsing library.

  • Deployment (Docker):

    • Security Implications:
      • Container Isolation: Docker provides some level of isolation, but misconfigurations can weaken this isolation.
      • Image Security: The Docker image should be built from a trusted base image and should not contain unnecessary software.
      • Network Configuration: The Docker network should be configured securely, limiting exposure of ports and using appropriate network policies.
      • Resource Limits: Docker resource limits (CPU, memory) should be set to prevent containers from consuming excessive resources.
      • Non-root User: The SRS process within the container should run as a non-root user to limit the impact of potential vulnerabilities.
    • Specific Areas: Dockerfile, Docker Compose file (if used), Kubernetes configuration (if used).

  • Build Process:

    • Security Implications:
      • Supply Chain Attacks: The build process should be secured to prevent attackers from injecting malicious code into the SRS binaries.
      • Reproducible Builds: Reproducible builds help ensure that the build process is deterministic and that the resulting binaries can be verified.
    • Specific Areas: configure script, Makefile.

3. Inferred Architecture, Components, and Data Flow

The C4 diagrams provided a good starting point. Based on the component analysis, we can infer the following:

  • Architecture: SRS follows a modular architecture, with separate components handling different protocols and functionalities. This is generally good for security, as it allows for better isolation and easier auditing.
  • Components: The key components are those listed above (RTMP Handler, WebRTC Handler, etc.).
  • Data Flow:
    1. Publishers connect to SRS via RTMP or WebRTC.
    2. The corresponding handler (RTMP or WebRTC) processes the incoming data.
    3. The handler passes the stream data to the Stream Multiplexer.
    4. The Stream Multiplexer routes the data to the appropriate output handlers (HLS, HTTP-FLV, WebRTC).
    5. The output handlers format the data and send it to viewers.
    6. The HTTP API allows for external management and monitoring of the server.

4. Specific Security Considerations for SRS

Based on the analysis, here are specific security considerations for SRS:

  • Prioritize Input Validation: Given the nature of streaming protocols (especially RTMP), rigorous input validation is the most critical security control. Focus on validating all data received from clients, including protocol headers, metadata, and media data. Fuzz testing is highly recommended for the RTMP and WebRTC handlers.
  • Secure Configuration: Provide secure default configurations and clear documentation on how to configure SRS securely. Emphasize the importance of changing default passwords and enabling authentication.
  • Dependency Management: Implement a robust dependency management process to track third-party libraries and their versions. Regularly update dependencies to address known vulnerabilities. Consider using a software composition analysis (SCA) tool.
  • Authentication and Authorization: Implement strong authentication and authorization for both publishing streams and accessing the HTTP API. Consider supporting multi-factor authentication (MFA) for the API.
  • Resource Management: Implement resource limits and rate limiting to prevent denial-of-service attacks. This should be configurable by the user.
  • Secure Deployment: Provide clear guidance on how to deploy SRS securely using Docker, including recommendations for network configuration, resource limits, and running as a non-root user.
  • TLS/DTLS: Ensure that TLS (for HTTP and RTMP) and DTLS (for WebRTC) are properly configured and use strong ciphers. Provide options for certificate management.
  • Regular Security Audits: Conduct regular security audits, including penetration testing and code reviews, to identify and address vulnerabilities.
  • HTTP API Security: The HTTP API is a high-risk area. Implement robust authentication, authorization, input validation, and rate limiting. Consider using an API gateway for added security.
  • HLS Security: Sanitize file paths to prevent path traversal vulnerabilities.
  • WebRTC Security: Carefully review the implementation of DTLS and SRTP, ensuring that they are up-to-date and free of known vulnerabilities.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies

Here are actionable mitigation strategies, tailored to SRS:

| Threat | Mitigation Strategy