Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
100 lines (74 loc) · 7.07 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

100 lines (74 loc) · 7.07 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for weidai11/cryptopp

Objective: Decrypt Data, Forge Signatures, or Execute Code (via Crypto++ Exploitation) [CRITICAL]

Attack Tree Visualization

                                      Attacker's Goal:
                                      Decrypt Data, Forge Signatures, or Execute Code
                                      (via Crypto++ Exploitation) [CRITICAL]
                                                |
                                                |
                      2. Misuse Crypto++ API / Configuration [CRITICAL]
                                                |
          -------------------------------------------------------------------------
          |                  |                  |                  |
    ***2.1 Incorrect      ***2.2 Weak Key      ***2.3 Predictable    2.5 Incorrect
    Algorithm Choice***   Management***[CRITICAL] IV/Nonce***          Padding
          |                  |                  |                  |
    ***2.1.1 Using DES    ***2.2.1 Hardcoded   ***2.3.1 Using        ***2.5.1 Padding
    instead of AES***   Keys*** [CRITICAL] system time       Oracle***
          |                                    as IV***
    ***2.1.2 Using ECB                        ***2.3.2 Reusing
    mode***                                    IV/Nonce*** [CRITICAL]

Attack Tree Path: 2. Misuse Crypto++ API / Configuration [CRITICAL]

  • Description: This represents the most likely and dangerous attack surface. It focuses on how the application incorrectly uses the Crypto++ library, even if the library itself is free of vulnerabilities. This is a critical node because misconfigurations can completely undermine the security provided by the library.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1 Incorrect Algorithm Choice (High-Risk Path)

  • Description: Choosing weak, outdated, or inappropriate cryptographic algorithms for the specific security requirements.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.1 Using DES instead of AES (High-Risk Path)

  • Description: Using the Data Encryption Standard (DES), which is considered cryptographically broken due to its short key size (56 bits). AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) should be used instead.
  • Likelihood: Low (Most developers are aware of DES's weakness)
  • Impact: High (Data encrypted with DES can be decrypted relatively easily)
  • Effort: Low (Brute-forcing DES is feasible with modern hardware)
  • Skill Level: Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Traffic analysis might reveal the use of weak ciphers)

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.2 Using ECB mode (High-Risk Path)

  • Description: Using Electronic Codebook (ECB) mode for block ciphers. ECB encrypts each block of plaintext independently, which can reveal patterns in the data, making it unsuitable for most applications. Secure modes like CBC, CTR, or GCM should be used.
  • Likelihood: Medium (A common mistake, especially for developers unfamiliar with cryptography)
  • Impact: High (Patterns in the encrypted data are visible, compromising confidentiality)
  • Effort: Low (Exploiting ECB weaknesses is well-understood)
  • Skill Level: Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Visual inspection of ciphertext can often reveal repeating patterns)

Attack Tree Path: 2.2 Weak Key Management (High-Risk Path) [CRITICAL]

  • Description: Improper handling of cryptographic keys, making them vulnerable to compromise. This is a critical node because compromised keys negate all cryptographic protections.

Attack Tree Path: 2.2.1 Hardcoded Keys (High-Risk Path) [CRITICAL]

  • Description: Storing cryptographic keys directly within the application's source code or executable. This is a critical vulnerability.
  • Likelihood: Medium (Unfortunately, a common practice in poorly secured applications)
  • Impact: Very High (Complete compromise of all encrypted data; attacker can decrypt and forge signatures)
  • Effort: Very Low (Requires only access to the source code or binary)
  • Skill Level: Novice
  • Detection Difficulty: Easy (If source code is available; harder if only the binary is available, but still possible with reverse engineering)

Attack Tree Path: 2.3 Predictable IV/Nonce (High-Risk Path)

  • Description: Using initialization vectors (IVs) or nonces that are predictable or reused, which severely weakens or completely breaks the security of many cryptographic algorithms.

Attack Tree Path: 2.3.1 Using system time as IV (High-Risk Path)

  • Description: Using the system's current time as the IV. This is predictable, especially if the attacker knows approximately when the data was encrypted.
  • Likelihood: Medium (A common mistake)
  • Impact: High (Compromises confidentiality, especially with stream ciphers and modes like CTR)
  • Effort: Low
  • Skill Level: Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Requires analyzing the code or network traffic)

Attack Tree Path: 2.3.2 Reusing IV/Nonce (High-Risk Path) [CRITICAL]

  • Description: Using the same IV/nonce with the same key for multiple encryption operations. This is a critical vulnerability, especially for stream ciphers and modes like CTR, as it can completely break confidentiality.
  • Likelihood: Medium (A common mistake)
  • Impact: Very High (Can allow complete decryption of the ciphertext)
  • Effort: Low
  • Skill Level: Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Requires analyzing network traffic or captured ciphertext)

Attack Tree Path: 2.5 Incorrect Padding

  • Description: Improper use of padding schemes, which can lead to vulnerabilities like padding oracle attacks.

Attack Tree Path: 2.5.1 Padding Oracle (High-Risk Path)

  • Description: A type of attack that exploits vulnerabilities in how an application handles padding errors when decrypting data. The attacker can use the server's responses to "oracle" queries (slightly modified ciphertexts) to decrypt the original ciphertext.
  • Likelihood: Medium
  • Impact: High (Allows decryption of ciphertext without knowing the key)
  • Effort: Medium
  • Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Often involves detecting repeated requests with slightly modified ciphertext; can be masked by rate limiting)