Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
132 lines (98 loc) · 161 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

132 lines (98 loc) · 161 KB

Deep Security Analysis of HiBeaver

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective: To conduct a thorough security analysis of the HiBeaver URL shortening service, focusing on identifying potential vulnerabilities and weaknesses in its key components, architecture, and data flow. The analysis will cover the application's design, implementation, and deployment, providing actionable recommendations to mitigate identified risks. The primary goal is to enhance the overall security posture of HiBeaver, protecting it from common web application attacks and ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its data and services.

Scope:

  • Codebase: The Rust source code available at https://github.com/hydraxman/hibeaver.
  • Dependencies: External Rust crates used by the project.
  • Deployment: The Docker Compose deployment model, as described in the security design review.
  • Architecture: The inferred architecture and data flow based on the codebase, documentation, and C4 diagrams.
  • Security Controls: Existing and recommended security controls outlined in the security design review.
  • Threat Model: Identification of potential threats based on the business priorities, risks, and security posture.

Methodology:

  1. Static Code Analysis: Review the Rust source code to identify potential vulnerabilities, such as input validation issues, insecure data handling, and logic errors. This will involve examining the code for common vulnerability patterns and using tools like cargo clippy and cargo audit.
  2. Dependency Analysis: Examine the project's dependencies (crates) for known vulnerabilities and potential supply chain risks. Tools like cargo audit and Dependabot will be used.
  3. Architecture Review: Analyze the inferred architecture and data flow, as depicted in the C4 diagrams, to identify potential security weaknesses in the system's design. This includes assessing the interactions between components and identifying potential attack vectors.
  4. Deployment Review: Evaluate the Docker Compose deployment model for security best practices, such as container isolation, network configuration, and volume management.
  5. Threat Modeling: Identify potential threats based on the business priorities, risks, and security posture. This will involve considering various attack scenarios and their potential impact.
  6. Security Control Assessment: Evaluate the effectiveness of existing and recommended security controls in mitigating identified threats.
  7. Recommendation Generation: Provide actionable and tailored recommendations to address identified vulnerabilities and weaknesses, improving the overall security posture of HiBeaver.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Based on the provided security design review and the inferred architecture, the following key components are analyzed:

  • Web Server (Actix Web):

    • Security Implications: This is the primary entry point for user interactions and is therefore a critical component for security. It handles HTTP requests, processes user input, interacts with the database, and generates responses. Vulnerabilities here could lead to various attacks, including XSS, CSRF, SQL injection (if not handled correctly by the database layer), and denial-of-service. The use of Actix Web itself doesn't inherently introduce vulnerabilities, but how it's used is crucial. The framework provides tools for secure handling of requests and responses, but these must be implemented correctly.
    • Specific Concerns:
      • Input Validation: The most critical aspect. The application must validate all input received from users, including the long URL, any custom URL slugs, and any parameters passed in requests. Failure to do so can lead to various injection attacks. The code needs to be checked for robust validation logic.
      • Output Encoding: The askama templating engine is used, which should provide automatic output encoding to prevent XSS. However, it's crucial to verify that this is configured and used correctly in all templates and that no raw HTML is being rendered without proper escaping.
      • Error Handling: Improper error handling can leak sensitive information about the system's internal workings. Error messages should be generic and not reveal details about the database, file system, or code.
      • Session Management: Currently, there's no authentication, but if implemented, secure session management is crucial. Sessions should be generated using cryptographically secure random numbers, have appropriate timeouts, and be protected against hijacking.
      • HTTP Headers: The application should set appropriate security headers (HSTS, CSP, X-Frame-Options, etc.) to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. This needs to be explicitly configured in the Actix Web application.
      • Redirect Handling: The core functionality of a URL shortener is redirection. The application must prevent open redirect vulnerabilities, where an attacker can craft a URL that redirects the user to a malicious site. This usually involves validating the target URL before redirecting. It also needs to prevent redirection loops.

  • Database (SQLite):

    • Security Implications: SQLite, while generally secure when used correctly, can be vulnerable to SQL injection if parameterized queries or an ORM are not used consistently. Since SQLite is file-based, file system permissions are also a crucial security consideration.
    • Specific Concerns:
      • SQL Injection: The code must use parameterized queries or an ORM (like sqlx) to interact with the database. String concatenation to build SQL queries is highly discouraged and a major vulnerability. The code needs to be carefully reviewed to ensure this is not happening.
      • File System Permissions: The db.sqlite file should have the most restrictive permissions possible, allowing only the user running the HiBeaver application to read and write to it. This prevents unauthorized access to the database file.
      • Data Encryption at Rest: While not currently implemented, encrypting the database file at rest would add an extra layer of security, protecting the data if the server is compromised. SQLite supports encryption extensions.
      • Backup and Recovery: Regular backups of the database file are essential for disaster recovery. The backup process should be secure, and backups should be stored in a secure location.

  • Dependencies (Rust Crates):

    • Security Implications: Dependencies are a common source of vulnerabilities. Even well-vetted crates can have undiscovered vulnerabilities, and less-maintained crates can be more risky. Supply chain attacks, where a malicious actor compromises a dependency, are a growing concern.
    • Specific Concerns:
      • Known Vulnerabilities: cargo audit is essential for identifying known vulnerabilities in dependencies. The build process should fail if any vulnerabilities are found.
      • Dependency Updates: Dependencies should be regularly updated to the latest versions to patch any security fixes. Tools like Dependabot can automate this process.
      • Crate Selection: When choosing dependencies, preference should be given to well-maintained, widely used, and actively audited crates. The security posture of the crate's maintainers should also be considered.
      • Unsafe Code: Rust's unsafe keyword allows bypassing some of the language's safety guarantees. While sometimes necessary for performance or low-level operations, unsafe code should be minimized and carefully reviewed, as it can introduce memory safety vulnerabilities. Dependencies using unsafe should be scrutinized.

  • Deployment (Docker Compose):

    • Security Implications: Docker provides containerization, which improves security through isolation. However, misconfigured Docker deployments can introduce new vulnerabilities.
    • Specific Concerns:
      • Image Security: The Docker image should be built from a minimal base image (e.g., a slim or scratch image) to reduce the attack surface. The image should be regularly rebuilt to include the latest security patches.
      • Container Isolation: Containers should be run with the least privileges necessary. The root user should be avoided inside the container if possible. Network access should be restricted to only the necessary ports.
      • Volume Permissions: The db.sqlite volume should have appropriate permissions, ensuring that only the HiBeaver container can access it.
      • Network Configuration: The Docker network should be configured securely, limiting communication between containers and the outside world. If exposing the application to the internet, a reverse proxy (like Nginx or Traefik) should be used to handle TLS termination and provide additional security features.
      • Secrets Management: Sensitive information, such as the DOMAIN and potentially database credentials (if not using SQLite's default file-based authentication), should be managed securely. Docker secrets or environment variables can be used, but they should not be hardcoded in the Dockerfile or committed to the repository.

  • URL Generation Logic:

    • Security Implications: The method used to generate short URLs is crucial for preventing collisions (two different long URLs generating the same short URL) and for making it difficult for attackers to guess or predict short URLs.
    • Specific Concerns:
      • Randomness: A cryptographically secure random number generator (CSPRNG) must be used to generate the short URL slugs. Using a weak random number generator would make it easier for attackers to predict short URLs and potentially discover sensitive long URLs. The nanoid crate, if used, should be configured to use a secure random number source.
      • Collision Resistance: The algorithm should minimize the probability of collisions. Using a sufficiently long and random slug makes collisions extremely unlikely. The code should handle potential collisions gracefully (e.g., by retrying with a different slug).
      • Length: The length of the generated short URL impacts both collision resistance and the ability to brute-force URLs. A longer slug is more secure.
      • Custom URL Handling: If custom URLs are allowed, they must be strictly validated to prevent attackers from creating short URLs that are misleading or that conflict with existing short URLs. They should also be checked against a denylist of reserved words or potentially malicious patterns.

3. Inferred Architecture, Components, and Data Flow

The C4 diagrams provided in the security design review give a good overview of the architecture. Here's a more detailed breakdown, inferring details from the codebase and documentation:

  1. User Interaction: A user interacts with HiBeaver through a web browser. They submit a long URL to be shortened, potentially through a web form or an API endpoint.

  2. Request Handling (Actix Web): The Actix Web server receives the request. This involves:

    • Routing: The request is routed to the appropriate handler based on the URL path and HTTP method.
    • Input Validation: The handler validates the long URL and any other input parameters.
    • Short URL Generation: If the input is valid, a short URL is generated. This likely involves using a cryptographically secure random number generator (e.g., through the nanoid crate) to create a unique slug.
    • Database Interaction: The handler interacts with the SQLite database to store the mapping between the short URL and the long URL. This is done using parameterized queries or an ORM to prevent SQL injection.

  3. Redirection: When a user accesses a short URL:

    • Lookup: The Actix Web server receives the request and extracts the short URL slug.
    • Database Query: The handler queries the SQLite database to retrieve the corresponding long URL.
    • Redirection Response: The server sends an HTTP redirect response (e.g., a 301 or 302 status code) to the browser, directing it to the long URL.

  4. Data Storage (SQLite): The SQLite database stores the URL mappings. The database schema likely includes at least a table with columns for the short URL slug and the long URL. If user authentication is implemented, there will be additional tables for user data.

  5. Deployment (Docker): The application is packaged as a Docker container. The container includes the compiled Rust binary, any necessary runtime dependencies, and potentially static assets. The db.sqlite file is stored in a Docker volume to ensure persistence.

4. Tailored Security Considerations

Given the specific nature of HiBeaver as a URL shortening service, the following security considerations are particularly important:

  • Open Redirect Prevention: This is the most critical vulnerability to address for a URL shortener. The application must validate the target URL before redirecting to it. This can involve:

    • Allowlist: Only allowing redirection to URLs that match a predefined list of trusted domains. This is the most secure approach but may not be practical for a general-purpose URL shortener.
    • Denylist: Blocking redirection to URLs that match a list of known malicious domains or patterns. This is less secure than an allowlist but can be more flexible.
    • URL Parsing and Validation: Parsing the URL and checking its components (scheme, domain, path, etc.) to ensure they conform to expected patterns. This can help prevent attacks that exploit URL parsing vulnerabilities.
    • User Confirmation: Displaying a confirmation page to the user before redirecting, showing the target URL and asking them to confirm that they want to proceed. This can help protect against phishing attacks.

  • Abuse Prevention: URL shorteners are often abused for malicious purposes, such as phishing, malware distribution, and spam. HiBeaver should implement mechanisms to mitigate this abuse:

    • Rate Limiting: Limit the number of short URLs that can be created by a single user or IP address within a given time period. This can help prevent attackers from creating large numbers of malicious short URLs.
    • URL Scanning: Integrate with a service (e.g., Google Safe Browsing API, VirusTotal API) to scan target URLs for malicious content before creating short links.
    • Reporting Mechanism: Allow users to report malicious short URLs.
    • Takedown Policy: Have a clear policy for taking down malicious short URLs.

  • Privacy: While URL shorteners inherently involve handling URLs, which may contain sensitive information, HiBeaver should minimize the collection and storage of personally identifiable information (PII).

    • Logging: If logging is implemented, avoid logging the full long URLs, especially if they contain sensitive parameters. Log only the necessary information for debugging and security monitoring.
    • Data Retention: Have a clear data retention policy, specifying how long URL mappings and other data will be stored.
    • GDPR/CCPA Compliance: If HiBeaver is used by users in regions with data privacy regulations (e.g., GDPR, CCPA), it must comply with those regulations.

  • Denial of Service (DoS): HiBeaver should be designed to be resilient to DoS attacks.

    • Rate Limiting: As mentioned above, rate limiting can help prevent DoS attacks.
    • Resource Limits: Configure resource limits (e.g., memory, CPU) for the application and the database to prevent attackers from exhausting server resources.
    • Scalability: Consider the potential for future growth and design the system to be scalable, either horizontally (by adding more instances) or vertically (by increasing resources on a single instance).

  • Brute-Force Protection: Prevent attackers from guessing short URLs by:

    • Using sufficiently long, randomly generated slugs.
    • Implementing rate limiting on redirection attempts.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies

Based on the identified threats and security considerations, the following mitigation strategies are recommended:

| Threat | Mitigation Strategy