Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
110 lines (99 loc) · 14.6 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

110 lines (99 loc) · 14.6 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for dotnet/roslyn

Mitigation Strategy: Input Validation and Sanitization for Code Generation

  • Mitigation Strategy: Input Validation and Sanitization for Code Generation
  • Description:
    1. Identify all input points: Pinpoint every location in your application where user input can influence the code generation process for Roslyn. This includes form fields, API parameters, file uploads, and any other source of external data that is used to construct code strings or influence code generation logic for Roslyn compilation.
    2. Define input validation rules: Establish strict rules for what constitutes valid input for each input point that feeds into Roslyn code generation. This should be based on the expected data type, format, length, and allowed characters necessary for generating valid code for Roslyn to compile. Use whitelists whenever possible (e.g., allow only alphanumeric characters and specific symbols if needed for code syntax).
    3. Implement input validation: Integrate validation logic at the earliest possible stage of input processing, ideally both on the client-side (for user feedback) and server-side (for security enforcement), specifically for inputs used in Roslyn code generation.
    4. Sanitize input: After validation, sanitize the input to remove or encode any potentially harmful characters or sequences that could be misinterpreted as code when used in Roslyn code generation. For example, if you are expecting a variable name, sanitize to remove characters outside of allowed variable name characters in the target language Roslyn is compiling.
    5. Use parameterized code generation: Employ parameterized code templates or code builder libraries instead of directly concatenating user input into code strings for Roslyn compilation. This separates code structure from user data, reducing injection risks specifically in the context of Roslyn.
    6. Regularly review validation rules: Periodically review and update your input validation rules to ensure they remain effective against evolving attack techniques and new input points that are used for Roslyn code generation.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Code Injection (High Severity): Malicious users inject arbitrary code into the application through input fields, leading to Remote Code Execution (RCE), data breaches, and system compromise by manipulating the code compiled and executed by Roslyn.
  • Impact:
    • Code Injection: High risk reduction. Effectively prevents code injection via Roslyn if implemented correctly.
  • Currently Implemented:
    • Partially implemented. Client-side validation is in place for some input fields in the code editor feature. Server-side validation is present but might not be comprehensive for all input points influencing Roslyn code generation.
    • Implemented in: frontend/js/input_validation.js, backend/api/code_generation_endpoint.cs
  • Missing Implementation:
    • Comprehensive server-side validation needs to be implemented for all input points used in Roslyn code generation, especially for API endpoints and file uploads. Parameterized code generation should be adopted throughout the Roslyn code generation logic.

Mitigation Strategy: Sandboxing and Isolation for Code Execution

  • Mitigation Strategy: Sandboxing and Isolation for Code Execution
  • Description:
    1. Choose a sandboxing mechanism: Select an appropriate sandboxing technology based on your application's environment and requirements. Options include operating system-level sandboxing (e.g., containers, namespaces), virtual machines, or language-level isolation (e.g., AppDomains in .NET Framework, separate processes in .NET Core/.NET) specifically for executing code compiled by Roslyn.
    2. Configure sandbox restrictions: Define strict restrictions for the sandboxed environment where Roslyn-compiled code will run. Limit access to:
      • File system: Restrict access to only necessary directories and files. Use read-only access where possible for the Roslyn execution environment.
      • Network: Disable or severely restrict network access for the Roslyn execution environment. If network access is required, use a whitelist of allowed destinations.
      • System resources: Set limits on CPU, memory, and other system resources available to the sandboxed process executing Roslyn code.
      • Sensitive APIs: Restrict access to potentially dangerous APIs that could be used for system manipulation or information disclosure from within the Roslyn execution environment.
    3. Execute Roslyn code in the sandbox: Configure your application to compile and execute dynamically generated code using Roslyn within the chosen sandboxed environment. Ensure that the Roslyn compilation and execution processes inherit the sandbox restrictions.
    4. Monitor sandbox activity: Implement monitoring and logging of activities within the sandbox where Roslyn code is executed to detect and respond to suspicious behavior.
    5. Regularly review sandbox configuration: Periodically review and update the sandbox configuration to ensure it remains effective and aligned with your security requirements for Roslyn code execution.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Remote Code Execution (RCE) (High Severity): Limits the impact of successful code injection into Roslyn-compiled code by preventing malicious code from accessing critical system resources or causing widespread damage.
    • Privilege Escalation (Medium Severity): Reduces the risk of malicious code executed by Roslyn escalating privileges within the system.
    • Data Breach (Medium Severity): Limits the ability of malicious code executed by Roslyn to access sensitive data stored on the system.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Medium Severity): Can help contain resource exhaustion caused by malicious code executed by Roslyn within the sandbox.
  • Impact:
    • RCE, Privilege Escalation, Data Breach, DoS: Medium to High risk reduction. Significantly reduces the impact of successful exploits originating from Roslyn-executed code by containing them within the sandbox.
  • Currently Implemented:
    • Not implemented. Currently, Roslyn code is executed within the main application process without any sandboxing or isolation.
    • Missing in: backend/code_execution_service.cs
  • Missing Implementation:
    • Sandboxing needs to be implemented for the code execution service that handles Roslyn execution. Containerization (e.g., Docker) or process isolation should be investigated and implemented to isolate Roslyn execution.

Mitigation Strategy: Resource Management and Rate Limiting for Compilation

  • Mitigation Strategy: Resource Management and Rate Limiting for Compilation
  • Description:
    1. Implement rate limiting: Introduce rate limiting mechanisms to restrict the number of Roslyn compilation requests from a single user or IP address within a specific time window. This can be implemented using middleware or dedicated rate limiting libraries specifically for Roslyn compilation endpoints.
    2. Set resource quotas: Configure resource quotas for Roslyn compilation processes. This includes:
      • CPU time limit: Set a maximum CPU time allowed for each Roslyn compilation task.
      • Memory limit: Set a maximum memory usage limit for each Roslyn compilation task.
      • Execution time limit: Set a maximum wall-clock time for each Roslyn compilation task.
    3. Implement timeouts: Set timeouts for Roslyn compilation operations to prevent long-running or potentially malicious compilation tasks from consuming resources indefinitely.
    4. Monitor resource usage: Implement monitoring of resource usage (CPU, memory, compilation queue length) during Roslyn compilation. Set up alerts for unusual spikes or patterns that might indicate a DoS attack targeting Roslyn compilation.
    5. Prioritize legitimate requests: If possible, prioritize legitimate Roslyn compilation requests over potentially malicious ones. This can be achieved through request queuing and prioritization algorithms for Roslyn compilation requests.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (High Severity): Prevents attackers from overwhelming the server with excessive Roslyn compilation requests, leading to service unavailability.
  • Impact:
    • DoS: High risk reduction. Effectively mitigates DoS attacks based on resource exhaustion through Roslyn compilation.
  • Currently Implemented:
    • Partially implemented. Basic timeouts are set for Roslyn compilation operations, but rate limiting and resource quotas are not fully implemented.
    • Implemented in: backend/code_compilation_service.cs (timeouts)
  • Missing Implementation:
    • Rate limiting needs to be implemented at the API gateway level or within the compilation service handling Roslyn compilation. Resource quotas (CPU, memory) should be configured for the Roslyn compilation processes. Monitoring of Roslyn compilation resource usage needs to be set up.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Handling of Compilation Errors and Diagnostics

  • Mitigation Strategy: Secure Handling of Compilation Errors and Diagnostics
  • Description:
    1. Review diagnostic messages: Carefully examine the diagnostic messages generated by Roslyn during compilation. Identify any messages that might reveal sensitive information, such as file paths, internal variable names, or code snippets exposed by Roslyn diagnostics.
    2. Sanitize diagnostic messages: Implement logic to sanitize Roslyn diagnostic messages before displaying them to users or logging them. This includes:
      • Redacting sensitive information: Remove or replace sensitive information from Roslyn diagnostics with generic placeholders.
      • Filtering detailed code snippets: Avoid displaying detailed code snippets from Roslyn diagnostics in error messages presented to users.
      • Providing generic error messages: Present users with generic, user-friendly error messages instead of raw Roslyn diagnostics.
    3. Secure logging of diagnostics: If detailed Roslyn diagnostics are needed for debugging, ensure they are logged securely. Store logs in a secure location with restricted access. Avoid logging sensitive information from Roslyn diagnostics in publicly accessible logs.
    4. Separate user-facing and internal error handling: Implement separate error handling paths for user-facing errors and internal logging/debugging of Roslyn compilation. User-facing errors should be generic and safe, while internal logs can contain more detail (sanitized Roslyn diagnostics).
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Information Disclosure (Medium Severity): Prevents attackers from gaining insights into the application's internal workings, code structure, or dependencies through detailed error messages generated by Roslyn. This information can be used to plan further attacks.
  • Impact:
    • Information Disclosure: Medium risk reduction. Reduces the risk of information leakage through Roslyn error messages.
  • Currently Implemented:
    • Partially implemented. Generic error messages are displayed to users in the frontend, but detailed Roslyn diagnostics are still logged in application logs without sanitization.
    • Implemented in: frontend/js/error_handling.js (generic messages)
  • Missing Implementation:
    • Diagnostic message sanitization needs to be implemented in the backend before logging Roslyn diagnostics. Secure logging practices with access control need to be enforced for diagnostic logs containing Roslyn output.

Mitigation Strategy: Code Review and Security Audits for Roslyn Integration

  • Mitigation Strategy: Code Review and Security Audits for Roslyn Integration
  • Description:
    1. Establish secure code review process: Incorporate security considerations into your code review process. Train developers on secure coding practices specifically related to Roslyn and dynamic code execution.
    2. Focus on Roslyn integration points: During code reviews, pay special attention to code sections that directly interact with Roslyn, including code generation, compilation, and execution logic.
    3. Conduct regular security audits: Perform periodic security audits specifically focused on the Roslyn integration points in your application. Engage security experts to conduct these audits with expertise in dynamic code analysis and Roslyn security.
    4. Penetration testing: Include penetration testing in your security assessment process to simulate real-world attacks and identify vulnerabilities in your Roslyn integration. Focus penetration testing efforts on areas utilizing Roslyn's capabilities.
    5. Address identified vulnerabilities: Promptly address any vulnerabilities identified during code reviews, security audits, or penetration testing related to Roslyn integration. Track remediation efforts and verify fixes.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • All Roslyn-Specific Threats (Variable Severity): Proactively identifies and mitigates a wide range of potential vulnerabilities related to Roslyn integration, including code injection, resource exhaustion, information disclosure, and others.
  • Impact:
    • All Roslyn-Specific Threats: High risk reduction. Provides a comprehensive approach to identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities across all threat categories related to Roslyn usage.
  • Currently Implemented:
    • Partially implemented. Code reviews are conducted for all code changes, but security-specific reviews focused on Roslyn integration are not consistently performed. Security audits specifically targeting Roslyn are not regularly scheduled.
    • Implemented in: Standard code review process
  • Missing Implementation:
    • Security-focused code reviews specifically targeting Roslyn integration should be implemented as a standard practice. Regular security audits and penetration testing focused on Roslyn should be scheduled and conducted.