Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
177 lines (150 loc) · 17.1 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

177 lines (150 loc) · 17.1 KB

Okay, let's perform a deep security analysis of the Moby project based on the provided design review.

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

  • Objective: To conduct a thorough security analysis of the Moby project's key components, identify potential vulnerabilities and weaknesses, and propose actionable mitigation strategies. The analysis will focus on the core engine, its interactions with other systems, and the build process, aiming to prevent container escapes, host compromise, data breaches, and other security incidents. We will specifically analyze the security controls mentioned in the document and identify potential gaps.

  • Scope: The scope includes the following components as described in the C4 diagrams and build process:

    • Moby Engine (API, Image Builder, Container Runtime, Networking, Volumes, libcontainer, containerd)
    • Interactions with external entities (Developers, Operators, Registries, Orchestrators, Security/Monitoring Tools, CI/CD)
    • The build process and associated security controls.
    • Deployment on a standalone Linux host.

    The scope excludes in-depth analysis of specific orchestrators (like Kubernetes) or cloud-provider specific implementations (AWS ECS, etc.), focusing instead on how Moby interacts with them at a high level. It also excludes a full code audit, focusing instead on architectural and design-level vulnerabilities.

  • Methodology:

    1. Component Breakdown: Analyze each component's responsibilities and security controls.
    2. Threat Modeling: Identify potential threats based on the component's function and interactions. We'll use the STRIDE model (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) as a framework.
    3. Vulnerability Analysis: Identify potential vulnerabilities based on known attack patterns and common weaknesses in containerization technologies.
    4. Mitigation Strategy Recommendation: Propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies for each identified vulnerability. These will be tailored to Moby's architecture and existing controls.
    5. Gap Analysis: Identify areas where existing security controls are insufficient or missing.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Let's break down each component and analyze its security implications:

2.1 Moby Engine

  • 2.1.1 API (REST/gRPC):

    • Threats:
      • Spoofing: Unauthorized clients impersonating legitimate users or systems.
      • Tampering: Modification of API requests in transit.
      • Information Disclosure: Exposure of sensitive data through API responses or error messages.
      • Denial of Service: Overwhelming the API with requests, making it unavailable.
      • Elevation of Privilege: Exploiting vulnerabilities in the API to gain unauthorized access.
      • Injection Attacks: Command injection, path traversal.
    • Vulnerabilities: Insufficient authentication/authorization, lack of input validation, improper error handling, weak TLS configuration.
    • Mitigation:
      • Strong Authentication: Implement robust authentication mechanisms, including support for MFA and integration with identity providers (LDAP, Active Directory). Enforce strong password policies.
      • Fine-grained Authorization: Implement RBAC with granular permissions for different API endpoints and resources. Follow the principle of least privilege.
      • Input Validation: Strictly validate all inputs to the API, including headers, parameters, and payloads. Use a whitelist approach whenever possible. Sanitize inputs to prevent injection attacks.
      • TLS/SSL: Enforce the use of TLS 1.2 or higher with strong cipher suites. Properly validate certificates.
      • Rate Limiting: Implement rate limiting to prevent DoS attacks.
      • Auditing: Log all API requests and responses, including authentication attempts, errors, and significant events.
      • Regular Security Audits and Penetration Testing: Specifically target the API for vulnerabilities.
      • Input Sanitization: Specifically protect against command injection and path traversal.

  • 2.1.2 Image Builder:

    • Threats:
      • Tampering: Modification of Dockerfiles or build context to inject malicious code.
      • Information Disclosure: Exposure of sensitive data (e.g., credentials) included in the build process.
      • Denial of Service: Resource exhaustion during image builds.
    • Vulnerabilities: Insecure Dockerfile instructions (e.g., using ADD with remote URLs, exposing secrets), vulnerabilities in base images, build cache poisoning.
    • Mitigation:
      • Dockerfile Best Practices: Enforce secure Dockerfile practices through linting and policy enforcement (e.g., dockerfile_lint). Avoid using ADD with remote URLs; use COPY instead. Minimize the use of RUN instructions.
      • Base Image Security: Use official, minimal base images from trusted sources. Regularly scan base images for vulnerabilities.
      • Build Context Control: Restrict the build context to only necessary files. Avoid including sensitive data in the build context.
      • Content Trust: Enforce the use of Docker Content Trust to ensure that only signed images are built and used.
      • Resource Limits: Set resource limits (CPU, memory) for build processes to prevent DoS.
      • Build Cache Management: Implement secure build cache management practices to prevent cache poisoning attacks. Consider using a dedicated, isolated build cache.
      • Secrets Management: Use build-time secrets features (e.g., docker build --secret) to securely inject secrets during the build process without embedding them in the image.

  • 2.1.3 Container Runtime:

    • Threats:
      • Elevation of Privilege: Container escape vulnerabilities allowing access to the host system.
      • Denial of Service: Resource exhaustion affecting other containers or the host.
      • Information Disclosure: Access to sensitive data from other containers or the host.
    • Vulnerabilities: Kernel exploits, vulnerabilities in libcontainer or containerd, misconfiguration of security profiles (AppArmor, Seccomp, SELinux).
    • Mitigation:
      • Security Profiles: Enforce strict AppArmor, Seccomp, and SELinux profiles for all containers. Customize profiles based on the specific needs of each application. Regularly audit and update these profiles.
      • User Namespaces: Ensure user namespaces are enabled and properly configured to isolate user IDs between the host and containers.
      • Capabilities: Drop unnecessary capabilities for all containers. Grant only the minimum required capabilities.
      • Read-only Root Filesystem: Mount the container's root filesystem as read-only whenever possible.
      • Kernel Hardening: Keep the host kernel up-to-date with the latest security patches. Consider using a hardened kernel (e.g., grsecurity).
      • Regular Security Audits: Focus on container escape vulnerabilities and runtime security.
      • Resource Limits (cgroups): Enforce resource limits (CPU, memory, I/O) on containers using cgroups to prevent DoS attacks.

  • 2.1.4 Networking Subsystem:

    • Threats:
      • Spoofing: Impersonating other containers or network services.
      • Tampering: Modification of network traffic.
      • Information Disclosure: Eavesdropping on network communication.
      • Denial of Service: Flooding the network or disrupting network services.
    • Vulnerabilities: Misconfigured network bridges, insecure network plugins, lack of network segmentation.
    • Mitigation:
      • Network Segmentation: Use Docker networks to isolate containers from each other and from the host network. Avoid using the default bridge network.
      • Network Policies: Implement network policies to control traffic flow between containers. Use a whitelist approach to allow only necessary communication.
      • Firewall Rules: Configure firewall rules on the host to restrict access to container ports.
      • Encryption: Use encrypted communication channels (e.g., TLS) for sensitive data transmitted between containers.
      • Network Plugin Security: Carefully evaluate the security of any third-party network plugins before using them.
      • Regular Audits: Audit network configurations and traffic patterns.

  • 2.1.5 Volume Management:

    • Threats:
      • Tampering: Modification of data stored in volumes.
      • Information Disclosure: Unauthorized access to data in volumes.
      • Denial of Service: Filling up storage space or making volumes unavailable.
    • Vulnerabilities: Insecure volume drivers, lack of access controls, improper permissions.
    • Mitigation:
      • Access Controls: Restrict access to volumes based on the principle of least privilege. Use appropriate user and group permissions.
      • Volume Driver Security: Carefully evaluate the security of any third-party volume drivers before using them.
      • Encryption: Encrypt sensitive data stored in volumes, both at rest and in transit.
      • Regular Backups: Regularly back up volume data to prevent data loss.
      • Auditing: Monitor access and changes to volumes.

  • 2.1.6 libcontainer & containerd:

    • Threats: These are low-level components; vulnerabilities here are extremely high-impact.
      • Elevation of Privilege: Exploits leading to container escapes.
      • Denial of Service: Crashing the runtime or the host.
    • Vulnerabilities: Bugs in the code that interacts directly with the kernel (namespaces, cgroups, etc.).
    • Mitigation:
      • Code Audits: Regular, in-depth code audits of libcontainer and containerd are crucial. Focus on areas that interact with the kernel.
      • Fuzzing: Use fuzzing techniques to identify potential vulnerabilities in these components.
      • Upstream Updates: Stay up-to-date with the latest releases and security patches from the upstream projects.
      • Kernel Hardening: As with the Container Runtime, a hardened kernel can mitigate some exploits.

2.2 Interactions with External Entities

  • Developers: The primary threat is malicious or compromised code being introduced into the build process. Mitigation focuses on secure coding practices, code signing, and image scanning.
  • Operators: The primary threat is misconfiguration or unauthorized access. Mitigation focuses on strong authentication, RBAC, and auditing.
  • Registries: The primary threat is unauthorized access to images or the distribution of malicious images. Mitigation focuses on authentication, authorization, image scanning, and content trust.
  • Orchestrators: The primary threat is misconfiguration or vulnerabilities in the orchestrator itself. Mitigation focuses on secure configuration of the orchestrator and using Moby's security features (AppArmor, Seccomp, etc.) to limit the impact of any orchestrator-level vulnerabilities.
  • Security/Monitoring Tools: These tools are generally beneficial, but it's important to ensure they are properly configured and secured themselves.
  • CI/CD Systems: The primary threat is compromise of the build pipeline. Mitigation focuses on securing the CI/CD environment, using secure build practices, and scanning images for vulnerabilities.

2.3 Build Process

  • Threats:
    • Tampering: Modification of code or dependencies during the build process.
    • Information Disclosure: Exposure of secrets or sensitive data during the build.
    • Supply Chain Attacks: Compromise of third-party dependencies.
  • Vulnerabilities: Insecure build environments, vulnerable dependencies, lack of code signing, insufficient image scanning.
  • Mitigation:
    • Secure Build Environment: Use isolated and ephemeral build environments (e.g., containers) to prevent contamination.
    • Dependency Management: Use a package manager with dependency pinning and checksum verification. Regularly scan dependencies for vulnerabilities.
    • Static Analysis (SAST): Integrate SAST tools into the build pipeline to identify code vulnerabilities.
    • Image Vulnerability Scanning: Use image scanning tools (e.g., Clair, Trivy) to identify known vulnerabilities in the built image.
    • Signed Commits: Require developers to sign their commits to ensure code integrity.
    • Least Privilege: Run build agents with minimal necessary privileges.
    • Artifact Signing: Sign the built container image using Docker Content Trust or other signing mechanisms.
    • Supply Chain Security: Consider using tools like in-toto or Sigstore to secure the software supply chain.
    • Reproducible Builds: Aim for reproducible builds to ensure that the same source code always produces the same binary output. This helps detect tampering.

3. Gap Analysis

Based on the review, here are some potential gaps in the existing security controls:

  • Dynamic Analysis (DAST): The document focuses on SAST and image scanning, but doesn't mention dynamic analysis of running containers. DAST tools can identify vulnerabilities that are only apparent at runtime.
  • Runtime Security Monitoring: While monitoring tools are mentioned, there's a lack of detail on specific runtime security monitoring and intrusion detection capabilities. Tools like Falco can detect anomalous behavior within containers.
  • Secrets Management Integration: While secrets management is mentioned, the document lacks specifics on how Moby integrates with different secrets management solutions and how to securely handle secrets during build and runtime.
  • Network Policy Enforcement: The document mentions network policies but doesn't detail how they are enforced within Moby (e.g., using CNI plugins in Kubernetes).
  • Vulnerability Management Program: While a vulnerability management program is recommended, the document doesn't describe the existing program's maturity or processes.
  • Compliance Requirements: The document doesn't address specific compliance requirements (e.g., PCI DSS, HIPAA), which can significantly impact security configurations.
  • Incident Response Plan: The document mentions a security response team but doesn't detail the incident response plan.

4. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Summary and Prioritization)

Here's a prioritized list of actionable mitigation strategies, combining the recommendations from the component analysis and gap analysis:

  • High Priority:

    • Implement a robust vulnerability management program: This includes automated scanning (SAST, DAST, image scanning), regular penetration testing, and a well-defined process for handling vulnerability reports and disclosures.
    • Enforce strict security profiles (AppArmor, Seccomp, SELinux): Customize and regularly audit these profiles for all containers.
    • Strengthen API security: Implement strong authentication (MFA), fine-grained authorization (RBAC), and thorough input validation.
    • Secure the build process: Implement secure build practices, including dependency management, SAST, image scanning, and artifact signing.
    • Implement runtime security monitoring: Use tools like Falco to detect anomalous behavior within containers and trigger alerts.
    • Address secrets management: Provide clear guidance and tooling for securely handling secrets during build and runtime, integrating with solutions like HashiCorp Vault.

  • Medium Priority:

    • Enhance network security: Implement network segmentation and policies to control traffic flow between containers.
    • Improve volume security: Implement access controls, encryption, and regular backups for volumes.
    • Conduct regular code audits: Focus on libcontainer and containerd, as well as the API.
    • Develop a comprehensive incident response plan: Define procedures for handling security incidents, including containment, eradication, recovery, and post-incident activity.

  • Low Priority:

    • Address specific compliance requirements: Configure Moby deployments to meet relevant compliance standards (if applicable).
    • Explore advanced security features: Consider using features like user namespaces, read-only root filesystems, and kernel hardening.

This deep analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the security considerations for the Moby project. By implementing these mitigation strategies, the Moby project can significantly enhance its security posture and reduce the risk of security incidents. Remember that security is an ongoing process, and continuous monitoring, evaluation, and improvement are essential.