Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
50 lines (41 loc) · 7.16 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

50 lines (41 loc) · 7.16 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for dotnet/reactive

Attack Surface: Observable Data Injection & Manipulation

  • Description: Attackers inject malicious data into reactive streams at their source, bypassing later validation or exploiting operator vulnerabilities.
  • Reactive Contribution: Rx.NET's core is Observables as data stream entry points. Unsecured external Observables become direct attack vectors, uniquely introduced by the reactive paradigm.
  • Example: A backend service uses an Observable to process messages from a message queue. An attacker injects a specially crafted message into the queue. If the service doesn't sanitize the message at the Observable source and directly uses it in a database query within a reactive pipeline, it could lead to SQL Injection.
  • Impact: Code injection, data corruption, denial of service, bypassing security controls.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Input Sanitization at Source: Strictly validate and sanitize all data entering reactive streams immediately at the Observable source.
    • Data Type Enforcement: Define and enforce rigid data types for Observables to restrict the kind of data flowing through the stream, minimizing injection possibilities.
    • Immutable Data: Utilize immutable data structures within reactive streams to prevent data modification after initial validation, ensuring data integrity throughout the pipeline.

Attack Surface: Operator Logic Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Flaws in custom operators or misuse of built-in operators create exploitable logical errors within reactive pipelines, leading to unexpected and potentially harmful behavior.
  • Reactive Contribution: Rx.NET's power comes from operators. Vulnerabilities within these operators, especially custom ones, are directly exploitable within the reactive data flow, a risk inherent to the operator-centric reactive approach.
  • Example: A custom operator designed for complex data aggregation has a vulnerability that allows it to process data outside of intended boundaries. An attacker can craft input data that exploits this operator flaw to gain access to aggregated data they shouldn't see, leading to information leakage.
  • Impact: Data manipulation, information leakage, denial of service, unexpected application behavior.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Rigorous Testing: Extensively test all custom operators and complex operator chains with diverse input scenarios, including boundary conditions and malicious inputs, to uncover logical flaws.
    • Static Analysis & Linters: Employ static analysis tools and linters specifically designed for reactive code to identify potential logical errors and security vulnerabilities in operator implementations and their usage patterns.
    • Code Reviews: Mandate peer code reviews for all custom operators and critical reactive pipelines to ensure multiple pairs of eyes scrutinize the logic for potential vulnerabilities.

Attack Surface: Backpressure Handling Issues & Resource Exhaustion

  • Description: Inadequate backpressure management allows fast producer Observables to overwhelm slower consumers, leading to resource exhaustion and denial of service. This is exacerbated in reactive systems where data flow is often asynchronous and potentially high-volume.
  • Reactive Contribution: Rx.NET's asynchronous nature and stream-based processing make backpressure a critical concern. Failure to properly implement backpressure in Rx.NET applications directly leads to this attack surface.
  • Example: A real-time monitoring system uses an Observable to process high-frequency sensor data. If backpressure is not implemented and the data processing pipeline (consumer) cannot keep pace with the sensor data rate (producer), the system's memory and CPU resources can be rapidly exhausted, resulting in a denial of service. An attacker could intentionally flood the sensors to trigger this.
  • Impact: Denial of service, application instability, resource exhaustion.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Implement Backpressure Strategies: Actively utilize Rx.NET's backpressure operators like Throttle, Debounce, Sample, Buffer, Window, ObserveOn, SubscribeOn to strategically manage data flow and prevent consumer overload. Select the most appropriate strategy based on the application's specific data flow characteristics.
    • Resource Monitoring & Alerting: Implement robust resource monitoring (CPU, memory, network) for reactive pipelines, especially under anticipated load. Set up alerts to proactively detect backpressure issues and resource exhaustion before they lead to service disruption.
    • Circuit Breaker Pattern: Integrate circuit breaker patterns into reactive pipelines to gracefully handle overload situations. When consumers are overwhelmed, temporarily halt data processing to prevent cascading failures and allow the system to recover.

Attack Surface: Dependency Vulnerabilities in Rx.NET or its Transitive Dependencies

  • Description: Known security vulnerabilities within Rx.NET itself or its underlying dependencies can be exploited if applications use outdated and vulnerable versions. This is a general dependency management issue, but crucial in the context of any library, including Rx.NET.
  • Reactive Contribution: While not unique to reactive programming, using Rx.NET introduces a dependency chain. Vulnerabilities in Rx.NET or its dependencies directly impact the security posture of applications built upon it.
  • Example: A publicly disclosed Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability is found in a specific version of Rx.NET or one of its transitive dependencies. Applications using this vulnerable version become susceptible to remote attacks if not patched promptly.
  • Impact: Wide range of vulnerabilities depending on the specific dependency vulnerability, potentially including remote code execution, denial of service, and information disclosure.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Regular Dependency Updates: Establish a process for regularly updating Rx.NET and all its dependencies to the latest secure versions. Automate this process where possible to ensure timely patching.
    • Dependency Scanning & Management Tools: Integrate dependency scanning tools (e.g., OWASP Dependency-Check, Snyk) into the development pipeline to automatically identify known vulnerabilities in project dependencies. Utilize dependency management tools to streamline updates and track dependency versions.
    • Security Advisory Monitoring: Proactively monitor security advisories and vulnerability databases specifically for Rx.NET and its dependencies. Subscribe to relevant security mailing lists and feeds to stay informed about newly discovered vulnerabilities and available patches.