Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
116 lines (95 loc) · 11.3 KB

File metadata and controls

116 lines (95 loc) · 11.3 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for hyperledger/fabric

Objective: Compromise Fabric Application

Attack Tree Visualization

Compromise Fabric Application [CRITICAL NODE] ├───(OR)─ Exploit Fabric Network Infrastructure [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Compromise Orderer Node [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Consensus Disruption (Raft/Kafka specific) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ ├─── Byzantine Fault Injection (Raft leader election manipulation) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ └─── Kafka Broker Compromise (Kafka based ordering) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Manipulate Transaction Ordering (Integrity) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ ├─── Orderer Compromise (Direct Access) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ └───(OR)─ Information Disclosure (Confidentiality) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ └─── Logging/Monitoring Data Leakage [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Compromise Peer Node [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Data Theft from Ledger (Confidentiality) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ ├─── Exploit Peer Software Vulnerability (e.g., Fabric code, OS) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Data Tampering in Ledger (Integrity) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ ├─── Peer Compromise & Ledger Manipulation [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ └───(OR)─ Channel Hijacking/Data Leakage (Confidentiality/Integrity) │ │ └─── Compromise Channel MSP (Membership Service Provider) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Compromise Certificate Authority (CA) / Membership Service Provider (MSP) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ CA Key Compromise (Identity Theft, Impersonation) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ ├─── Weak Key Generation/Storage [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ ├─── CA Software Vulnerability [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ │ └─── Insider Threat/Malicious Administrator [HIGH RISK PATH] ├───(OR)─ Exploit Chaincode (Smart Contract) Vulnerabilities [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Logic Bugs in Chaincode (Integrity, Confidentiality, Availability) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Access Control Bypass in Chaincode Logic [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Data Validation Failures [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ └───(OR)─ Business Logic Flaws (e.g., incorrect state transitions) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Chaincode Backdoors/Malware (Integrity, Confidentiality) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├─── Malicious Code Injection during Development [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├─── Supply Chain Attacks (Compromised Dependencies) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ └─── Insider Threat - Malicious Chaincode Deployment [HIGH RISK PATH] ├───(OR)─ Exploit Application-Fabric Integration (Client SDK) [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Insecure Key Management in Application [HIGH RISK PATH] │ ├───(OR)─ Application Logic Vulnerabilities Exploiting Fabric Features [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ ├───(OR)─ Information Leakage through Application APIs exposing Fabric Data [HIGH RISK PATH] │ │ └───(OR)─ Business Logic Flaws in Application leveraging Fabric Functionality [HIGH RISK PATH] └───(OR)─ Social Engineering / Insider Threat [HIGH RISK PATH] ├─── Phishing Attacks against Network Participants [HIGH RISK PATH] └─── Insider Malicious Actions (Data Theft, Sabotage) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH] └─── Compromised Administrator Accounts [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]

This is the ultimate goal. Achieving this means successfully exploiting one or more of the underlying attack paths to compromise the application's security posture.

This path focuses on attacking the core components of the Hyperledger Fabric network itself. Success here can have widespread and severe consequences.

*   **2.1. Compromise Orderer Node [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   Orderers are critical for transaction ordering and consensus. Compromising them can lead to:
        *   **2.1.1. Consensus Disruption (Raft/Kafka specific) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
            *   **Byzantine Fault Injection (Raft leader election manipulation) [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Attackers can attempt to manipulate the Raft leader election process to gain control or disrupt consensus.
            *   **Kafka Broker Compromise (Kafka based ordering) [HIGH RISK PATH]:** If Kafka is used for ordering, compromising Kafka brokers can allow attackers to manipulate transaction order or disrupt the ordering service.
        *   **2.1.2. Manipulate Transaction Ordering (Integrity) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
            *   **Orderer Compromise (Direct Access) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Gaining direct access to the orderer node allows attackers to directly manipulate the order of transactions, leading to critical integrity breaches.
        *   **2.1.3. Information Disclosure (Confidentiality) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
            *   **Logging/Monitoring Data Leakage [HIGH RISK PATH]:**  Orderer logs and monitoring data might contain sensitive information. If not secured properly, attackers can access this data for reconnaissance or direct data breaches.

*   **2.2. Compromise Peer Node [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   Peers store the ledger and execute chaincode. Compromising them can lead to:
        *   **2.2.1. Data Theft from Ledger (Confidentiality) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
            *   **Exploit Peer Software Vulnerability (e.g., Fabric code, OS) [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Exploiting vulnerabilities in the peer software or underlying OS can grant attackers access to the peer's file system and ledger data.
        *   **2.2.2. Data Tampering in Ledger (Integrity) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
            *   **Peer Compromise & Ledger Manipulation [HIGH RISK PATH]:**  Once a peer is compromised, attackers can directly manipulate the ledger data stored on that peer, leading to integrity violations.
        *   **2.2.3. Channel Hijacking/Data Leakage (Confidentiality/Integrity):**
            *   **Compromise Channel MSP (Membership Service Provider) [HIGH RISK PATH]:** If the MSP for a channel is compromised on a peer, attackers can potentially impersonate members of that channel or gain unauthorized access to channel data.

*   **2.3. Compromise Certificate Authority (CA) / Membership Service Provider (MSP) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   CA/MSPs manage identities and trust within the Fabric network. Compromising them is extremely critical.
        *   **2.3.1. CA Key Compromise (Identity Theft, Impersonation) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
            *   **Weak Key Generation/Storage [HIGH RISK PATH]:** If CA private keys are generated weakly or stored insecurely, attackers can steal them.
            *   **CA Software Vulnerability [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Vulnerabilities in the CA software itself can be exploited to extract private keys or gain control of the CA.
            *   **Insider Threat/Malicious Administrator [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Malicious insiders with administrative access to the CA can directly steal or misuse CA keys.

Chaincode contains the core application logic and data access rules. Vulnerabilities here can directly impact the application's functionality and data.

*   **3.1. Logic Bugs in Chaincode (Integrity, Confidentiality, Availability) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   **Access Control Bypass in Chaincode Logic [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Flaws in chaincode's access control logic can allow unauthorized users to perform actions or access data they shouldn't.
    *   **Data Validation Failures [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Insufficient input validation in chaincode can lead to unexpected behavior, data corruption, or vulnerabilities.
    *   **Business Logic Flaws (e.g., incorrect state transitions) [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Errors in the chaincode's business logic can lead to incorrect state updates, financial losses, or other application-specific issues.

*   **3.2. Chaincode Backdoors/Malware (Integrity, Confidentiality) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   **Malicious Code Injection during Development [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Attackers can inject malicious code into chaincode during the development process.
    *   **Supply Chain Attacks (Compromised Dependencies) [HIGH RISK PATH]:**  Compromised dependencies used by the chaincode can introduce vulnerabilities or malicious functionality.
    *   **Insider Threat - Malicious Chaincode Deployment [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Malicious insiders with deployment privileges can deploy backdoored or malicious chaincode.

Vulnerabilities in how the application integrates with Fabric through the Client SDK can be exploited.

*   **4.1. Insecure Key Management in Application [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   If the application doesn't securely manage cryptographic keys used for interacting with Fabric (e.g., storing keys in plaintext, hardcoding keys), attackers can steal these keys and impersonate the application.
*   **4.2. Application Logic Vulnerabilities Exploiting Fabric Features [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   **Information Leakage through Application APIs exposing Fabric Data [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Application APIs that expose Fabric data without proper access control or sanitization can leak sensitive information.
    *   **Business Logic Flaws in Application leveraging Fabric Functionality [HIGH RISK PATH]:** Flaws in the application's business logic that interacts with Fabric can be exploited to manipulate data or processes on the blockchain.

Human factors are always a significant risk.

*   **5.1. Phishing Attacks against Network Participants [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   Phishing attacks can target users or administrators to steal credentials, which can then be used to gain access to Fabric components or application systems.
*   **5.2. Insider Malicious Actions (Data Theft, Sabotage) [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   Malicious insiders with legitimate access can intentionally steal data, disrupt services, or sabotage the Fabric application.
*   **5.3. Compromised Administrator Accounts [CRITICAL NODE] [HIGH RISK PATH]:**
    *   If administrator accounts are compromised (e.g., through weak passwords, lack of MFA), attackers can gain full control over Fabric components and the application.