Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
133 lines (118 loc) · 11.7 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

133 lines (118 loc) · 11.7 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for dart-lang/shelf

Mitigation Strategy: Input Validation within Handlers

  • Description:
    1. Identify all handler functions in your shelf application that process user-provided data from shelf's Request object (query parameters, headers, request body).
    2. For each handler, extract the relevant input data using shelf's Request API (e.g., request.url.queryParameters, request.headers, request.readAsString()).
    3. Implement validation checks for each input field within your handler logic. This includes type, format, range, and allowed values validation, and sanitization.
    4. If validation fails, create a shelf Response with an appropriate HTTP error status code (e.g., Response.badRequest()) and a user-friendly error message.
    5. Consider using Dart validation libraries to streamline validation logic within shelf handlers.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Injection Attacks (High Severity): SQL Injection, Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), Command Injection, etc.
    • Data Integrity Issues (Medium Severity): Application logic errors and data corruption.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Low to Medium Severity): Processing malformed input.
  • Impact:
    • Injection Attacks (High): High - Significantly reduces injection attack risks.
    • Data Integrity Issues (Medium): Medium - Reduces application errors.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Low to Medium): Low to Medium - Offers some DoS protection.
  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented in user registration and login handlers within auth_middleware.dart.
  • Missing Implementation: Missing in API endpoints in api_handlers.dart and file uploads in upload_handler.dart. Sanitization is generally missing.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Response Construction

  • Description:
    1. When building shelf Response objects in your handlers, be mindful of the data being included.
    2. Output Encoding: Encode user-provided or external data appropriately before including it in the shelf Response body, especially for HTML responses (HTML entity encoding).
    3. Content-Type Header: Set the Content-Type header in the shelf Response (e.g., Response.ok('body', headers: {'Content-Type': 'application/json'})) to accurately reflect the response format.
    4. Security Headers: Include security headers in the shelf Response headers (e.g., Response.ok('body', headers: {'X-Frame-Options': 'DENY'})) to enhance client-side security.
    5. Cookie Security: If setting cookies using shelf's Response (via headers: {'Set-Cookie': ...}), configure HttpOnly, Secure, and SameSite attributes.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (High Severity): If user data is in HTML responses without encoding.
    • MIME Sniffing Vulnerabilities (Medium Severity): Incorrect Content-Type headers.
    • Session Hijacking/Cookie Theft (High Severity): Insecure cookie configuration.
    • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (Medium Severity): Partially mitigated by SameSite cookie attribute.
  • Impact:
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (High): High - Significantly reduces XSS risks.
    • MIME Sniffing Vulnerabilities (Medium): Medium - Prevents content misinterpretation.
    • Session Hijacking/Cookie Theft (High): High - Reduces session hijacking risk.
    • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (Medium): Low to Medium - Some CSRF protection.
  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented. Content-Type headers are generally set. HttpOnly and Secure flags are set for session cookies.
  • Missing Implementation: Consistent HTML encoding. SameSite cookie attribute. Security headers are not consistently implemented within shelf responses.

Mitigation Strategy: Robust Error Handling in Handlers

  • Description:
    1. Use try-catch blocks within shelf handlers to handle exceptions.
    2. In catch blocks, create a shelf Response (e.g., Response.internalServerError()) to return an error response.
    3. Error Status Codes: Use appropriate HTTP error status codes in shelf Response objects.
    4. Error Messages: Provide user-friendly error messages in the shelf Response body, avoiding sensitive server details.
    5. Logging: Log detailed errors server-side, but not in shelf Response bodies intended for clients.
    6. Centralized Error Handling: Consider using shelf middleware to create a consistent error handling mechanism across the application.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Information Disclosure (Medium to High Severity): Exposing stack traces in error responses.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Low Severity): Uncontrolled exceptions leading to crashes.
  • Impact:
    • Information Disclosure (Medium to High): Medium to High - Reduces information leaks.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Low): Low - Improves application stability.
  • Currently Implemented: Basic try-catch in some handlers, inconsistent error responses, stack traces sometimes exposed in development.
  • Missing Implementation: Centralized error handling middleware. Consistent and secure error responses across all handlers. Production error responses need review.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Middleware Implementation

  • Description:
    1. Treat custom shelf middleware with the same security care as handlers.
    2. Input Validation in Middleware: If middleware processes request data, validate it like in handlers, using shelf's Request API.
    3. Authorization Checks in Middleware: If implementing authorization middleware, ensure correct enforcement and test thoroughly.
    4. Exception Handling in Middleware: Implement robust error handling in middleware to prevent disruptions and return safe shelf Response errors or pass control safely.
    5. Security Audits: Regularly audit custom middleware code for vulnerabilities.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Authentication/Authorization Bypasses (High Severity): Flaws in middleware allowing unauthorized access.
    • Injection Attacks (High Severity): Middleware processing unvalidated input.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Medium Severity): Inefficient middleware causing performance issues.
    • Information Disclosure (Medium Severity): Middleware logging or errors leaking information.
  • Impact:
    • Authentication/Authorization Bypasses (High): High - Critical for access control.
    • Injection Attacks (High): High - Prevents middleware vulnerabilities.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Medium): Medium - Improves performance and resilience.
    • Information Disclosure (Medium): Medium - Reduces information leaks.
  • Currently Implemented: Custom authentication middleware (auth_middleware.dart) exists, but lacks dedicated security audits. Basic input validation in middleware.
  • Missing Implementation: Formal security audit of custom middleware. More robust input validation. Dedicated exception handling within middleware.

Mitigation Strategy: Vetting Third-Party Middleware

  • Description:
    1. Exercise caution with third-party shelf middleware packages.
    2. Source and Reputation: Choose middleware from reputable sources.
    3. Security Audits (if available): Check for security audits of the middleware.
    4. Code Review (if possible): Review open-source middleware code for vulnerabilities.
    5. Dependency Updates: Keep third-party shelf middleware dependencies updated.
    6. Minimize Usage: Only use necessary third-party middleware.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Vulnerabilities in Third-Party Code (High to Critical Severity): Vulnerabilities in middleware packages.
    • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium to High Severity): Compromised middleware packages.
  • Impact:
    • Vulnerabilities in Third-Party Code (High to Critical): High - Reduces risks from external dependencies.
    • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium to High): Medium to High - Mitigates supply chain risks.
  • Currently Implemented: Using shelf_logger, basic vetting done by checking package popularity.
  • Missing Implementation: Formal security vetting process for third-party shelf middleware. No code review or security audit of shelf_logger. Dependency scanning for middleware not in CI/CD.

Mitigation Strategy: Middleware Ordering and Configuration

  • Description:
    1. Plan middleware order in your shelf pipeline carefully.
    2. Authentication before Authorization: Place authentication middleware before authorization middleware in shelf's Pipeline.
    3. Logging Middleware Placement: Place logging middleware strategically in the shelf Pipeline.
    4. Configuration Review: Review configuration options for each middleware used in shelf's Pipeline.
    5. Testing Middleware Pipeline: Test the entire shelf middleware pipeline for correct security policy enforcement.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Authentication/Authorization Bypasses (High Severity): Incorrect middleware order/config bypassing checks.
    • Security Policy Enforcement Failures (Medium to High Severity): Misconfigured middleware not enforcing policies.
  • Impact:
    • Authentication/Authorization Bypasses (High): High - Prevents bypasses due to ordering/config.
    • Security Policy Enforcement Failures (Medium to High): Medium to High - Ensures correct policy application.
  • Currently Implemented: Middleware order defined in server.dart, authentication before authorization. Basic logging middleware config.
  • Missing Implementation: Formal security review of middleware order/config. No specific tests for middleware pipeline security. Configuration options not fully reviewed for security best practices.

Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Update Shelf and Dependencies

  • Description:
    1. Use pub to manage shelf and other dependencies.
    2. Regular Updates: Regularly check for updates to shelf and dependencies, especially security updates.
    3. Automated Dependency Scanning: Integrate dependency scanning tools into CI/CD to identify vulnerabilities in shelf and its dependencies.
    4. Patching Vulnerabilities: Update to patched versions of vulnerable shelf or dependencies promptly.
    5. Dependency Pinning (with caution): Review and update pinned dependencies regularly for security patches.
  • Threats Mitigated:
    • Vulnerabilities in Dependencies (High to Critical Severity): Outdated shelf or dependencies with known vulnerabilities.
    • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium to High Severity): Compromised shelf or dependencies.
  • Impact:
    • Vulnerabilities in Dependencies (High to Critical): High - Reduces risks from dependency vulnerabilities.
    • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium to High): Medium to High - Mitigates supply chain risks.
  • Currently Implemented: Dependency management via pubspec.yaml, manual update checks.
  • Missing Implementation: Automated dependency scanning in CI/CD. No formal process for regular security-based updates. Dependency pinning strategy review needed.