Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
91 lines (76 loc) · 9.85 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

91 lines (76 loc) · 9.85 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for schollz/croc

Mitigation Strategy: Prioritize Direct Connections

  • Description:
    1. Assess Direct Connectivity: Determine if sender and receiver are on the same network or have direct network connectivity.
    2. Utilize --no-relay Flag: When initiating a croc transfer, the sender should use the --no-relay flag in the command. Example: croc send --no-relay important_file.txt. This instructs croc to attempt a direct peer-to-peer connection, bypassing relay servers.
    3. croc Handles Connection: croc will automatically attempt to establish a direct connection. If unsuccessful, it will fall back to relay servers (unless other flags prevent this).
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) Attacks via Relay Servers (High Severity): Reduces risk by avoiding intermediary relay servers when possible.
    • Impact: Significantly reduces MITM risk by bypassing relays in direct connection scenarios.
    • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented. The --no-relay flag is a feature of croc.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing from standard usage guidelines and automated workflows where direct connections are feasible. Users may not be consistently using this flag when appropriate.

Mitigation Strategy: Verify Fingerprints

  • Description:
    1. Sender Notes Fingerprint: When starting a croc send operation, the sender should observe the cryptographic fingerprint displayed by croc in the terminal output.
    2. Receiver Notes Fingerprint: When starting a croc receive operation, the receiver should also observe the cryptographic fingerprint displayed by croc.
    3. Out-of-Band Verification: The sender must communicate their fingerprint to the receiver through a separate, trusted channel (e.g., secure messaging, verbally).
    4. Compare Fingerprints in croc: The receiver compares the fingerprint received out-of-band with the fingerprint displayed by their croc instance. They must match exactly for secure connection confirmation.
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) Attacks via Relay Servers (High Severity): Allows manual verification that the croc connection is directly with the intended party and not intercepted.
    • Impact: Significantly reduces MITM risk by enabling manual verification of connection integrity within croc's process.
    • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented. croc displays fingerprints, but active user verification is not enforced or consistently practiced.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing from standard user procedures and training. Users need to be educated to actively perform fingerprint verification for security.

Mitigation Strategy: Use Private Relay Servers (via --relay flag)

  • Description:
    1. Deploy Private Relay: An organization sets up its own croc relay server within its infrastructure.
    2. Configure --relay Flag: Users, when using croc, should utilize the --relay flag followed by the address of their private relay server. Example: croc send --relay my-private-relay.example.com:9009 file_to_send.txt.
    3. croc Connects to Private Relay: croc will then use the specified private relay server for connection brokering and relaying data if direct connection fails.
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) Attacks via Relay Servers (Medium Severity): Reduces risk by using a relay server under organizational control instead of public, potentially less secure, relays.
      • Data Confidentiality Risks (Medium Severity): Limits data exposure to potentially untrusted public relay operators.
    • Impact: Moderately reduces MITM and confidentiality risks by controlling the relay infrastructure used by croc.
    • Currently Implemented: Not currently implemented as a default. croc supports the --relay flag, but users typically rely on public relays by default.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing from standard configurations and user guidance. Organizations needing higher security should configure and promote the use of private relay servers with the --relay flag.

Mitigation Strategy: Enforce Strong Passphrases (using --pass flag)

  • Description:
    1. Utilize --pass Flag: Senders should use the --pass flag when initiating croc transfers to provide a custom passphrase. Example: croc send --pass "StrongComplexPhrase" sensitive_data.zip.
    2. Choose Strong Passphrases: Users must select strong, unpredictable passphrases. Avoid weak or easily guessable phrases.
    3. croc Uses Provided Passphrase: croc will use the passphrase provided via --pass for encrypting the transfer, instead of relying solely on the generated code.
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Data Confidentiality Risks (Medium Severity): Strengthens encryption by using user-defined, potentially more complex passphrases, making brute-force attacks harder.
    • Impact: Moderately reduces data confidentiality risk by enhancing passphrase strength for croc's encryption.
    • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented. The --pass flag is a feature of croc, but its usage is not enforced or consistently encouraged.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing from standard security practices and user training. Users should be encouraged to use the --pass flag with strong passphrases, especially for sensitive data.

Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Update croc

  • Description:
    1. Check for Updates: Regularly check for new versions of croc on the official GitHub repository or release channels.
    2. Download and Install Updates: Download the latest version of croc and install it, replacing the older version. Follow the installation instructions for your operating system.
    3. Benefit from Patches: Updating ensures you have the latest security patches and bug fixes included in croc.
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Data Confidentiality Risks (Medium to High Severity): Outdated croc versions may contain known vulnerabilities that could compromise encryption.
      • Data Integrity Concerns (Low to Medium Severity): Bugs in older versions could lead to data corruption.
      • Authentication and Authorization Weaknesses (Low to Medium Severity): Security flaws in code handling or authentication might exist in older versions.
    • Impact: Moderately to significantly reduces risks associated with known vulnerabilities in croc by keeping the tool up-to-date.
    • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented. Users are responsible for updating croc themselves. There is no built-in auto-update mechanism within croc.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing a formal update process and potentially in-tool update notifications. Users need to be reminded and guided to regularly update croc.

Mitigation Strategy: Use Longer, Randomly Generated Codes (using --code flag)

  • Description:
    1. Utilize --code Flag with Custom Code: When sending with croc, use the --code flag to specify a custom transfer code. Example: croc send --code "aVeryLongRandomCodeString" file.txt.
    2. Generate Strong Codes: Create codes that are long, random strings of characters (letters, numbers, symbols). Use a password generator or secure random number generator for this.
    3. croc Uses Custom Code: croc will use the provided custom code instead of generating a short numerical code.
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Authentication and Authorization Weaknesses (Code-Based Sharing) (Low to Medium Severity): Makes brute-force guessing of the transfer code significantly harder due to the increased code complexity.
    • Impact: Moderately reduces the risk of unauthorized access by strengthening the code-based authentication in croc.
    • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented. The --code flag is a feature, but users are not typically guided to use longer, stronger custom codes. Default is short, generated codes.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing from standard usage recommendations and user training. Users should be advised to use the --code flag with strong, custom-generated codes for enhanced security.

Mitigation Strategy: Use Ephemeral Codes (If Possible/Implemented - Feature Request)

  • Description:
    1. Request Feature: If not available, request or contribute to the development of ephemeral or single-use codes in croc.
    2. Code Expiration Logic: If implemented, croc would generate codes that automatically expire after a short time or after a single successful use.
    3. Enable Ephemeral Codes (If Option Exists): If such a feature is added to croc, enable it in configurations or use command-line flags to activate ephemeral codes for transfers.
    • List of Threats Mitigated:
      • Information Disclosure (Code Leakage) (Low to Medium Severity): Reduces the window of opportunity for misuse of leaked codes as they would expire quickly.
      • Authentication and Authorization Weaknesses (Code-Based Sharing) (Low Severity): Limits the risk of code reuse for unauthorized access if a code is compromised, as it becomes invalid after first use or time limit.
    • Impact: Slightly to moderately reduces risks related to code compromise by limiting the code's validity.
    • Currently Implemented: Not currently implemented in standard croc. This is a feature that would need to be added to croc.
    • Missing Implementation: Missing from croc's core functionality. Requires feature development within croc itself.