Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
48 lines (41 loc) · 7.54 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

48 lines (41 loc) · 7.54 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for gradleup/shadow

Attack Surface: Dependency Conflict Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Merging dependencies with conflicting versions can lead to the introduction or re-introduction of vulnerabilities if a vulnerable version overrides a secure one, or if incompatible versions cause unexpected behavior that can be exploited.
  • Shadow Contribution: Shadow directly merges dependencies into a single JAR, necessitating conflict resolution. If not handled correctly, or if developers are unaware of underlying version conflicts, Shadow can inadvertently package vulnerable dependency combinations, directly contributing to this attack surface.
  • Example:
    • Application depends on library A version 1.0 (vulnerable).
    • Another dependency, library B, transitively depends on library A version 2.0 (secure).
    • Shadow, by default or due to misconfiguration in dependency resolution within the build, might prioritize or include A version 1.0 in the shaded JAR, effectively downgrading the security posture and re-introducing a known vulnerability due to its merging process.
  • Impact: Introduction of known vulnerabilities, potentially leading to code execution, data breaches, or denial of service.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical (depending on the severity of the introduced vulnerability).
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Dependency Management: Use dependency management tools (like Gradle's dependency resolution strategies) to explicitly control dependency versions and resolve conflicts before shading. This is crucial because Shadow's merging amplifies the risk of unresolved conflicts.
    • Vulnerability Scanning: Scan dependencies before and after shading using vulnerability scanners to identify and address any introduced vulnerabilities. Scanning after shading is specifically important to catch issues introduced by the merging process.
    • Dependency Tree Analysis: Analyze the dependency tree to understand version conflicts and ensure that secure versions are prioritized during shading. This proactive step is vital when using Shadow due to its dependency aggregation.
    • Explicit Dependency Versions: Declare explicit versions for critical dependencies in your build file to avoid relying on transitive dependency resolution that might introduce vulnerable versions, especially when using Shadow which bundles everything together.

Attack Surface: Shading and Relocation Misconfiguration

  • Description: Incorrectly configured shading rules can expose internal classes/APIs or break library functionality due to improper relocation, leading to unexpected behavior or security loopholes.
  • Shadow Contribution: Shadow's core functionality is package renaming and relocation. Misconfiguration in the shadowJar task's relocate or exclude configurations directly leads to this attack surface. Without Shadow, this specific attack surface related to package manipulation would not exist in the same way.
  • Example:
    • Developer intends to shade internal utility classes but accidentally includes a configuration that exposes a sensitive internal API endpoint by failing to relocate it or incorrectly relocating it to a predictable path due to misconfigured Shadow rules.
    • Relocating a library's packages in a way that breaks its internal assumptions about class loading or resource access, causing unexpected behavior that can be exploited, directly resulting from Shadow's relocation mechanism.
  • Impact: Exposure of sensitive internal APIs, bypassing security controls, unexpected application behavior, potential for code execution or denial of service.
  • Risk Severity: Medium to High (depending on the sensitivity of exposed APIs and the severity of broken functionality). Can be Critical if core security mechanisms are bypassed.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Principle of Least Privilege in Shading: Only shade what is absolutely necessary. Avoid broad shading rules that might inadvertently expose internal components. This is especially important with Shadow as it aggressively bundles code.
    • Thorough Testing of Shaded JAR: After shading, rigorously test the application to ensure that shading hasn't broken functionality or exposed unintended APIs. This testing is crucial after using Shadow's transformation capabilities.
    • Review Shading Configuration: Carefully review and document shading configurations to ensure they align with security and design principles. Shadow configurations need extra scrutiny due to their powerful transformation capabilities.
    • Static Analysis of Shading Rules: Use static analysis tools (if available or develop custom scripts) to analyze shading rules for potential over-exposure or misconfigurations. This is a proactive measure to catch Shadow misconfigurations early.

Attack Surface: Shadow Plugin and Underlying Library Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Vulnerabilities in the Shadow plugin itself or in the underlying libraries it uses for JAR manipulation can be exploited during the build process, potentially compromising the build or the resulting shaded JAR.
  • Shadow Contribution: The Shadow plugin is a piece of software and relies on other libraries. Vulnerabilities in these components directly impact the security of the build process when using Shadow. Exploiting Shadow itself or its dependencies is a direct attack vector related to using the plugin.
  • Example:
    • A vulnerability in the JAR manipulation library used by Shadow allows for arbitrary code execution when processing a specially crafted JAR dependency. An attacker could exploit this by providing a malicious dependency that triggers the vulnerability during the Shadow shading process.
    • A vulnerability in the Shadow plugin's Gradle task implementation allows for injection of malicious code into the build process when Shadow is executed.
  • Impact: Compromised build process, injection of malicious code into the application, denial of service of the build system, supply chain compromise.
  • Risk Severity: Medium to High (depending on the severity of the vulnerability and the potential for supply chain attacks). Can be Critical in supply chain scenarios.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Keep Shadow Plugin Updated: Regularly update the Shadow plugin to the latest version to benefit from security patches and bug fixes. This is a direct mitigation for vulnerabilities in Shadow itself.
    • Monitor Shadow Plugin Security Advisories: Subscribe to security advisories or release notes for the Shadow plugin to stay informed about potential vulnerabilities. Proactive monitoring is key for plugin-specific risks.
    • Dependency Scanning of Build Tools: Consider scanning build tools and plugins (including Shadow) for known vulnerabilities as part of a broader security strategy. This extends vulnerability scanning to the build process itself, which is directly relevant when using build plugins like Shadow.
    • Secure Build Environment: Harden the build environment to limit the impact of potential vulnerabilities in build tools and plugins. A secure build environment is a general best practice, but especially important when relying on build plugins like Shadow that perform complex operations.