Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
101 lines (85 loc) · 8.28 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

101 lines (85 loc) · 8.28 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for hydraxman/hibeaver

Objective: Compromise Application via HiBeaver Exploitation

Attack Tree Visualization

Goal: Compromise Application via HiBeaver Exploitation ├── 1. Data Exfiltration │ ├── 1.1 Exploit Event Data Handling │ │ ├── 1.1.1 Inject Malicious Event Data │ │ │ └── 1.1.1.1 Bypass Input Validation in Custom Event Class (if poorly implemented by the application using HiBeaver) [HIGH-RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE] │ │ ├── 1.1.3 Exploit Logging of Event Data │ │ │ └── 1.1.3.1 Access Unprotected Log Files (if HiBeaver or the application logs sensitive event data insecurely) [HIGH-RISK PATH] │ └── 1.2 Exploit Middleware [CRITICAL NODE] │ └── 1.2.1 Inject Malicious Middleware │ └── 1.2.1.1 Bypass Middleware Validation (if the application doesn't properly validate loaded middleware) [HIGH-RISK PATH] │ └── 1.2.1.2 Exploit Vulnerabilities in Legitimate Middleware (if a used middleware has known vulnerabilities) [HIGH-RISK PATH] ├── 2. Code Execution │ ├── 2.1 Exploit Event Handler Vulnerabilities │ │ ├── 2.1.1 Inject Code via Event Data │ │ │ └── 2.1.1.1 Bypass Input Sanitization in Custom Event/Handler (application-specific, but facilitated by HiBeaver) [HIGH-RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE] │ │ └── 2.1.2 Exploit Deserialization Vulnerabilities │ │ └── 2.1.2.1 If HiBeaver uses unsafe deserialization (e.g., pickle) for event data, inject malicious serialized objects. [HIGH-RISK PATH] │ └── 2.2 Exploit Middleware (Same as 1.2)

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.1.1 Bypass Input Validation in Custom Event Class

  • Description: The attacker crafts a malicious event payload that is not properly validated by the custom event class defined in the application using HiBeaver. This allows the attacker to inject arbitrary data, potentially leading to data exfiltration or further exploitation.
  • Likelihood: Medium (Depends heavily on application code quality)
  • Impact: High (Potential for sensitive data exposure)
  • Effort: Low (If validation is weak or absent)
  • Skill Level: Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (May be detected by input validation logs or unusual application behavior)
  • Mitigation: Implement strict input validation using a robust validation library (e.g., Pydantic, Cerberus). Define clear schemas for event data and reject any input that doesn't conform.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.3.1 Access Unprotected Log Files

  • Description: The attacker gains access to log files that contain sensitive information from events processed by HiBeaver. This could be due to misconfigured file permissions, predictable log file locations, or other vulnerabilities that expose the log files.
  • Likelihood: Medium (Depends on logging practices and file permissions)
  • Impact: Medium to High (Depends on the sensitivity of logged data)
  • Effort: Low (If files are accessible)
  • Skill Level: Novice
  • Detection Difficulty: Easy (If file access is monitored) / Hard (If not monitored)
  • Mitigation: Avoid logging sensitive data. Implement secure logging practices, including:
    • Strict file permissions (only authorized users/processes can read).
    • Log rotation to prevent log files from growing too large.
    • Consider encrypting log files, especially if they contain sensitive data.
    • Monitor access to log files.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.1.1 Bypass Middleware Validation

  • Description: The attacker successfully bypasses the application's middleware validation mechanism, allowing them to load and execute arbitrary, malicious middleware. This gives the attacker complete control over the event processing pipeline.
  • Likelihood: Low (Requires compromising the middleware loading mechanism)
  • Impact: Very High (Full control over event processing)
  • Effort: High (Requires understanding and exploiting the loading process)
  • Skill Level: Advanced
  • Detection Difficulty: Hard (Unless strict middleware integrity checks are in place)
  • Mitigation: Implement a robust middleware validation mechanism, such as:
    • Code signing: Verify the digital signature of middleware before loading.
    • Checksum verification: Compare the checksum of the middleware against a known-good value.
    • Whitelist: Only allow loading of pre-approved middleware.
    • Sandboxing: Run middleware in a restricted environment to limit its capabilities.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.1.2 Exploit Vulnerabilities in Legitimate Middleware

  • Description: The attacker exploits a known vulnerability in a legitimate middleware component used by the application. This could allow the attacker to achieve various goals, including data exfiltration, code execution, or denial of service.
  • Likelihood: Medium (Depends on the presence of vulnerable middleware and public exploits)
  • Impact: High to Very High (Depends on the vulnerability)
  • Effort: Low to Medium (If public exploits are available)
  • Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Vulnerability scanners may detect outdated middleware)
  • Mitigation:
    • Keep middleware up-to-date: Regularly update all middleware components to the latest versions to patch known vulnerabilities.
    • Use a vulnerability scanner: Regularly scan the application and its dependencies for known vulnerabilities.
    • Monitor security advisories: Stay informed about security advisories related to the middleware being used.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.1.1 Bypass Input Sanitization in Custom Event/Handler

  • Description: Similar to 1.1.1.1, but specifically targeting the handler logic. The attacker injects code (e.g., shell commands, Python code) into the event data, and the handler, lacking proper sanitization, executes this code.
  • Likelihood: Medium (Depends on application code quality)
  • Impact: Very High (Arbitrary code execution)
  • Effort: Low to Medium (If sanitization is weak or absent)
  • Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard (May require code analysis or runtime monitoring)
  • Mitigation:
    • Strict input sanitization: Remove or escape any characters that could be interpreted as code. Never directly use user-supplied input in functions like eval(), exec(), or system calls.
    • Use parameterized queries or prepared statements if interacting with databases.
    • Contextual output encoding: If event data is used to generate output (e.g., HTML), use appropriate output encoding to prevent cross-site scripting (XSS).

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.2.1 If HiBeaver uses unsafe deserialization (e.g., pickle) for event data, inject malicious serialized objects.

  • Description: If the application or HiBeaver itself uses an unsafe deserialization method like Python's pickle to process event data, an attacker can craft a malicious serialized object that, when deserialized, executes arbitrary code.
  • Likelihood: Low (Assuming HiBeaver avoids unsafe deserialization; application must also avoid it)
  • Impact: Very High (Arbitrary code execution)
  • Effort: Medium (Requires crafting a malicious serialized object)
  • Skill Level: Advanced
  • Detection Difficulty: Hard (Requires deep understanding of the serialization format and application logic)
  • Mitigation:
    • Avoid unsafe deserialization: Never use pickle or similar methods with untrusted data.
    • Use safer alternatives: Prefer JSON for serialization. If a more complex format is needed, use a library with a strong security track record and carefully validate the deserialized data (e.g., using a schema).