Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
37 lines (30 loc) · 5.09 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

37 lines (30 loc) · 5.09 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for mahapps/mahapps.metro

Attack Surface: 1. Flyout Content Injection

  • Description: Injecting malicious content into MahApps.Metro Flyouts, particularly if the Flyout's content is loaded dynamically from an untrusted source.
  • MahApps.Metro Contribution: Flyouts are a core and prominent feature of MahApps.Metro, providing a specific mechanism for displaying content. This direct involvement makes it a key attack surface. The library itself does not perform sanitization; it's entirely the developer's responsibility.
  • Example: An application loads Flyout content from a remote server without proper sanitization. An attacker compromises the server and injects malicious JavaScript into the Flyout content, leading to XSS when a user opens the Flyout.
  • Impact: XSS, phishing, data theft, potentially leading to further compromise.
  • Risk Severity: High.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developers: Sanitize all content loaded into Flyouts, especially if it comes from external sources. Treat Flyout content with the same level of security scrutiny as any other user-facing control. Use a Content Security Policy (CSP) if applicable, and consider restricting the capabilities of scripts within the Flyout. Validate data types and structure rigorously.
    • Users: (Limited direct mitigation). Be wary of applications that load Flyout content from unfamiliar or untrusted sources.

Attack Surface: 2. Input Validation Bypass (Control Level - Specific Cases)

  • Description: Exploiting weaknesses in input validation within specific MahApps.Metro-styled controls where the visual styling or control behavior might mislead developers into overlooking standard validation. This is not about all controls, but about cases where MahApps.Metro's features could contribute to the oversight.
  • MahApps.Metro Contribution: While MahApps.Metro doesn't remove the need for validation, the enhanced appearance and features of certain controls (e.g., NumericUpDown with custom formatting, DatePicker with culture-specific handling) could create a higher risk of developer error if standard WPF validation practices are not meticulously followed. The direct contribution is the potential for misinterpreting the control's capabilities.
  • Example:
    • A NumericUpDown control is styled to accept currency symbols. The developer assumes the control handles currency validation, but it only handles basic numeric input. An attacker injects a malicious string that bypasses the numeric check but is then used in a database query.
    • A DatePicker is used with a custom culture setting. The developer doesn't fully account for all possible date formats allowed by that culture, leading to a parsing error that can be exploited.
  • Impact: Data breaches, unauthorized data modification, code execution (in the case of XSS, if the control's output is displayed unsanitized), denial of service.
  • Risk Severity: High.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developers: Implement robust input validation using WPF's built-in validation mechanisms (IDataErrorInfo, ValidationRules) regardless of the MahApps.Metro control's appearance or features. Do not rely on the control's visual styling to imply any level of built-in security. Use regular expressions and explicit type checks. Always parameterize SQL queries. Sanitize output. Understand the specific validation requirements of each control type, including culture-specific considerations.
    • Users: (Limited direct mitigation). Be cautious about entering unusual characters.

Attack Surface: 3. Dependency Vulnerabilities (Direct MahApps.Metro Vulnerabilities)

  • Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities directly within the MahApps.Metro library itself. This excludes vulnerabilities in other libraries that MahApps.Metro depends on.
  • MahApps.Metro Contribution: This is a direct attack surface because the vulnerability resides within the MahApps.Metro code.
  • Example: A hypothetical vulnerability is discovered in MahApps.Metro's Flyout handling that allows an attacker to bypass intended security restrictions and inject arbitrary code.
  • Impact: Varies depending on the specific vulnerability, but could range from denial-of-service to code execution within the context of the application.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical (depending on the vulnerability).
  • Mitigation Strategies: * Developers: Keep MahApps.Metro updated to the latest stable version. Monitor the official MahApps.Metro GitHub repository and security advisories for any reported vulnerabilities. Consider using a Software Composition Analysis (SCA) tool to specifically track vulnerabilities in MahApps.Metro. * Users: Install application updates promptly, especially those that mention security fixes.