Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
135 lines (122 loc) · 11.6 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

135 lines (122 loc) · 11.6 KB

Threat Model Analysis for hyperledger/fabric

Threat: Compromised Certificate Authority (CA)

  • Description:
    • An attacker gains control of a Certificate Authority (CA) server or its private key, which is a core component of Fabric's identity management.
    • They can issue valid certificates for any identity within the Fabric network (peers, orderers, clients).
    • This allows impersonation of legitimate users and bypasses Fabric's fundamental trust model.
  • Impact:
    • Critical. Complete breakdown of trust within the Fabric network's identity system.
    • Unauthorized access to all Fabric network resources and data.
    • Ability to perform malicious transactions and manipulate the ledger, undermining data integrity.
    • Network takeover and complete compromise of Fabric security.
  • Affected Component:
    • Membership Service Provider (MSP) - relies on CA for identity validation.
    • Certificate Authority (CA) component - the source of identity compromise.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Strong CA Security: Implement robust physical and logical security for CA servers.
    • Hardware Security Modules (HSMs): Store CA private keys in HSMs for enhanced protection.
    • Regular CA Audits: Conduct frequent security audits of CA infrastructure and processes.
    • Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Enforce MFA for CA administrators to prevent unauthorized access.
    • Monitoring and Alerting: Implement comprehensive monitoring and alerting for suspicious CA activity.

Threat: Stolen or Compromised Member Private Keys (Critical Identities)

  • Description:
    • An attacker obtains the private key of a critical Fabric network member, such as a peer, orderer, or network administrator. This is directly related to Fabric's identity management.
    • This could be through targeted attacks, insider threats, or exploitation of vulnerabilities in key storage.
    • With these keys, attackers can impersonate core Fabric components or administrators.
  • Impact:
    • High to Critical (Critical if orderer or admin keys are compromised, High for peer keys).
    • Unauthorized transactions and data access, potentially bypassing Fabric's access controls.
    • Manipulation of network configurations if administrator keys are compromised, directly affecting Fabric governance.
    • Denial of service by disrupting critical Fabric components like peers or orderers.
  • Affected Component:
    • Membership Service Provider (MSP) - relies on key validity.
    • Peer and Orderer nodes - compromised if their keys are stolen.
    • Client SDKs and applications - if admin client keys are stolen.
  • Risk Severity: High (Peer Keys) to Critical (Orderer/Admin Keys)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Key Storage: Enforce HSMs or encrypted keystores for critical Fabric component keys (peers, orderers, admins).
    • Principle of Least Privilege: Limit the number of administrator identities and their scope.
    • Key Rotation: Implement regular key rotation for critical Fabric identities.
    • Access Control and Monitoring: Implement strict access controls and monitoring for systems storing private keys.

Threat: Orderer Service Denial of Service (DoS)

  • Description:
    • An attacker targets the Fabric ordering service, a central component for transaction ordering and block creation.
    • They flood the orderer with excessive transaction requests or exploit vulnerabilities in the orderer software itself.
    • This directly disrupts Fabric's core function of transaction processing and consensus.
  • Impact:
    • High. Network downtime and inability to process transactions within the Fabric network.
    • Halting Fabric network operations and preventing block creation, stopping all application activity.
    • Potential data inconsistencies if transactions are partially processed before the DoS on the Fabric ledger.
  • Affected Component:
    • Ordering Service (Orderer nodes) - the direct target of the DoS.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Rate Limiting (Fabric Level): Implement rate limiting on transaction submissions at the Fabric gateway or within the application interacting with Fabric.
    • Resource Monitoring and Scaling (Orderer): Monitor orderer resource utilization and scale orderer resources to handle expected Fabric transaction load.
    • Firewall and Network Security (around Orderer): Use firewalls and network security to protect the orderer network infrastructure.
    • Regular Security Patching (Orderer Software): Keep orderer software up-to-date with the latest Fabric security patches.
    • Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS) (Network Level): Deploy IDS/IPS to detect and prevent DoS attacks targeting the Fabric network.

Threat: Peer Node Compromise

  • Description:
    • An attacker gains unauthorized access to a Fabric peer node, a fundamental component for ledger storage and chaincode execution.
    • This could be through exploiting vulnerabilities in the peer software, insecure peer server configuration, or targeted attacks.
    • Compromised peers directly expose Fabric ledger data and chaincode execution environment.
  • Impact:
    • High. Data breaches and unauthorized access to Fabric ledger data stored on the peer.
    • Manipulation of chaincode execution on that specific peer, potentially leading to inconsistent state if not detected by consensus.
    • Denial of service by disrupting peer operations, impacting Fabric network performance and availability.
  • Affected Component:
    • Peer Node - the compromised component.
    • Ledger (data stored on the peer) - directly exposed.
    • Chaincode (installed on the peer) - execution environment compromised.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Peer Node Hardening: Implement strong server hardening practices specifically for Fabric peer nodes.
    • Regular Security Patching (Peer Software): Keep peer node software and operating systems patched with the latest Fabric security updates.
    • Firewall and Network Segmentation (around Peers): Isolate peer nodes within secure network segments using firewalls.
    • Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS) (Network Level): Deploy IDS/IPS to detect and prevent intrusions on Fabric peer nodes.
    • Access Control and Monitoring (Peer Access): Implement strict access controls and monitoring for peer node access and activity.
    • Regular Vulnerability Scanning (Peer Nodes): Conduct regular vulnerability scans specifically targeting Fabric peer nodes.

Threat: Ledger Data Breach (Confidentiality Issues)

  • Description:
    • Unauthorized access to Fabric ledger data stored on peer nodes, a core data repository of the Fabric network.
    • This could be through peer node compromise, insider threat with access to peer storage, or vulnerabilities in Fabric's data access controls.
    • Even with Private Data Collections, vulnerabilities in Fabric's access control mechanisms could lead to data exposure.
  • Impact:
    • High to Critical (Critical if highly sensitive data is breached).
    • Exposure of sensitive business data and confidential information stored within the Fabric ledger.
    • Violation of privacy regulations if personal data is stored on the Fabric ledger and breached.
    • Reputational damage and loss of trust in the Fabric application and network.
  • Affected Component:
    • Ledger (state database and block storage) - the location of the data breach.
    • Peer Node - where ledger data is stored and accessed.
    • Private Data Collections (if used) - potential bypass of intended privacy.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Access Control Lists (ACLs) (Fabric Level): Implement and rigorously enforce ACLs on Fabric ledger data and chaincode access using Fabric's MSP and channel configurations.
    • Private Data Collections (Fabric Feature): Utilize Fabric's Private Data Collections to restrict data access to authorized organizations within the Fabric network.
    • Data Encryption at Rest (Peer Storage): Encrypt ledger data at rest on peer nodes' storage using OS-level or storage-level encryption.
    • Secure Key Management for Encryption (Fabric Level): Implement secure key management practices for any encryption keys used within the Fabric network or for ledger encryption.
    • Regular Security Audits of Data Access Controls (Fabric Configuration): Conduct regular audits of Fabric's data access control configurations (MSP, channel policies, chaincode access control logic).

Threat: Malicious Chaincode (Insider Threat or Compromised Developer)

  • Description:
    • Chaincode (smart contracts), the core application logic in Fabric, is intentionally developed with malicious intent by an insider or a compromised developer with Fabric development access.
    • Malicious chaincode deployed to Fabric can contain backdoors, data exfiltration mechanisms specifically designed to exploit Fabric functionalities, or logic bombs that target Fabric operations.
    • This directly manipulates the application logic running on the Fabric network.
  • Impact:
    • Critical. Data breaches and exfiltration of sensitive information directly from the Fabric ledger.
    • Manipulation of business logic and Fabric network operations through the deployed malicious chaincode.
    • Long-term compromise of the Fabric application and network if malicious chaincode is deployed and trusted by network participants.
    • Reputational damage and legal repercussions due to malicious activity originating from the Fabric application.
  • Affected Component:
    • Chaincode (smart contracts) - the malicious component itself.
    • Peer Node (chaincode execution environment) - where the malicious code runs.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Development Lifecycle (SDLC) (Fabric Chaincode Focused): Implement a secure SDLC specifically for Fabric chaincode development, including Fabric-aware code reviews and security testing.
    • Background Checks for Developers (Fabric Developers): Conduct background checks on developers with access to Fabric chaincode development and deployment.
    • Principle of Least Privilege for Developers (Fabric Access): Grant developers only necessary access to Fabric development and deployment environments.
    • Code Signing and Chaincode Provenance (Fabric Feature): Utilize Fabric's chaincode lifecycle management features, including code signing and provenance mechanisms, to verify chaincode origin and integrity.
    • Multi-Person Approval for Chaincode Deployment (Fabric Governance): Require multi-person approval for chaincode deployment to production Fabric environments, enforcing Fabric network governance policies.
    • Monitoring and Auditing of Chaincode Deployment and Execution (Fabric Operations): Implement monitoring and auditing of chaincode deployment and execution within the Fabric network for suspicious activity.