Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
180 lines (147 loc) · 15.9 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

180 lines (147 loc) · 15.9 KB

Okay, let's perform a deep security analysis of the docker-ci-tool-stack project based on the provided security design review.

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

  • Objective: The objective is to conduct a thorough security analysis of the key components of the docker-ci-tool-stack, identifying potential vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and attack vectors. This analysis will focus on the security implications of the chosen architecture, the interactions between components, and the data flows. The goal is to provide actionable mitigation strategies to improve the overall security posture of the system. We will specifically focus on the risks associated with using a pre-packaged CI tool stack.

  • Scope: The scope includes:

    • The Docker Compose configuration (docker-compose.yml).
    • The individual Docker images used for the CI tools (Jenkins, SonarQube, and any others mentioned).
    • The interactions between these containers.
    • The data flow between the containers, the host system, and external services (source code repositories, artifact repositories, etc.).
    • The build process (as defined in the design review).
    • The deployment options (local, dedicated server, cloud VM, Kubernetes).
    • The security controls, both existing and recommended.

  • Methodology:

    1. Architecture Review: Analyze the C4 diagrams and deployment diagrams to understand the system's architecture, components, and their relationships.
    2. Component Analysis: Examine each key component (Jenkins, SonarQube, Docker Compose, etc.) individually, focusing on its security-relevant aspects. This includes identifying potential attack surfaces, common vulnerabilities, and configuration best practices.
    3. Data Flow Analysis: Trace the flow of sensitive data (source code, credentials, build artifacts) through the system, identifying potential points of exposure.
    4. Threat Modeling: Identify potential threats based on the architecture, components, and data flows. Consider attacker motivations and capabilities.
    5. Mitigation Strategy Development: Propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies to address the identified threats and vulnerabilities. These strategies should be tailored to the docker-ci-tool-stack project.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Let's break down the security implications of each key component:

  • Docker Compose:

    • Implication: Docker Compose orchestrates the containers, defining their networking and dependencies. Misconfiguration can lead to unintended exposure of services or data. The Docker socket (/var/run/docker.sock) is a critical security concern if exposed improperly.
    • Specific Threats: Container escape, unauthorized access to other containers, denial-of-service by resource exhaustion.
    • Mitigation:
      • Least Privilege: Run Docker containers with the least necessary privileges. Avoid using the --privileged flag unless absolutely necessary. Use user namespaces to map container users to less privileged host users.
      • Network Segmentation: Use Docker networks to isolate containers from each other and from the host network. Explicitly define network connections in the docker-compose.yml file. Avoid exposing ports unnecessarily.
      • Resource Limits: Set resource limits (CPU, memory) on containers to prevent denial-of-service attacks. Use the deploy key in docker-compose.yml for resource constraints.
      • Docker Socket Protection: Never expose the Docker socket directly to containers unless absolutely required and with extreme caution. If a container needs to interact with the Docker daemon, consider using the Docker API through a secure proxy or a dedicated "Docker-in-Docker" (dind) container with appropriate security measures.
      • Regular Updates: Keep Docker Compose and the Docker Engine updated to the latest versions to patch security vulnerabilities.

  • Jenkins Container:

    • Implication: Jenkins is a powerful automation server with a large attack surface due to its extensive plugin ecosystem. Vulnerabilities in Jenkins or its plugins can lead to arbitrary code execution, data breaches, and system compromise.
    • Specific Threats: Unauthenticated remote code execution, cross-site scripting (XSS), cross-site request forgery (CSRF), credential theft, unauthorized access to source code and build artifacts.
    • Mitigation:
      • Authentication and Authorization: Always enable Jenkins authentication and use strong passwords. Implement role-based access control (RBAC) to restrict user permissions. Integrate with an external identity provider (LDAP, OAuth) if possible.
      • Plugin Security: Carefully vet and select Jenkins plugins. Only install plugins from trusted sources. Keep plugins updated to the latest versions. Regularly review installed plugins and remove any that are unnecessary or outdated. Use the Jenkins Plugin Manager's security warnings.
      • Secure Configuration: Disable unnecessary features and services in Jenkins. Configure CSRF protection. Use HTTPS for all Jenkins communication. Restrict access to the Jenkins web interface using network policies.
      • Credential Management: Never store credentials directly in Jenkins job configurations or scripts. Use the Jenkins Credentials Plugin to securely store and manage credentials. Consider integrating with a secrets management solution like HashiCorp Vault.
      • Agent Security: If using Jenkins agents (slaves), ensure they are securely configured and isolated from the master Jenkins server. Use separate credentials for agent communication.

  • SonarQube Container:

    • Implication: SonarQube analyzes source code for vulnerabilities and code quality issues. While primarily a security tool, SonarQube itself can be vulnerable to attacks, potentially leading to data breaches or system compromise. Exposure of SonarQube reports could reveal vulnerabilities to attackers.
    • Specific Threats: SQL injection, XSS, authentication bypass, unauthorized access to code analysis reports.
    • Mitigation:
      • Authentication and Authorization: Enable SonarQube authentication and use strong passwords. Configure role-based access control to restrict user permissions.
      • Secure Configuration: Change the default administrator password. Disable unnecessary features and services. Use HTTPS for all SonarQube communication. Restrict access to the SonarQube web interface using network policies.
      • Database Security: Use a strong password for the SonarQube database. Restrict network access to the database to only the SonarQube container. Consider using a separate, dedicated database server instead of an embedded database. Regularly back up the database.
      • Input Validation: While SonarQube itself should handle input validation, ensure that the data fed into SonarQube (e.g., source code) is not manipulated to trigger vulnerabilities.
      • Regular Updates: Keep SonarQube updated to the latest version to patch security vulnerabilities.

  • Other Tool Containers (Nexus, Artifactory, etc.):

    • Implication: These tools have their own specific security considerations. For example, artifact repositories like Nexus and Artifactory can be targets for attackers seeking to inject malicious code into build artifacts.
    • Specific Threats: Vary depending on the tool. Common threats include unauthorized access, code injection, denial-of-service.
    • Mitigation: Apply the same general security principles as with Jenkins and SonarQube: strong authentication, authorization, secure configuration, regular updates, network segmentation, and least privilege. Consult the security documentation for each specific tool.

  • SonarQube Database Container:

    • Implication: Contains the results of the code analysis.
    • Specific Threats: SQL Injection.
    • Mitigation:
      • Access Restriction: Only SonarQube container should have access to database.
      • Strong Credentials: Use strong, unique credentials.
      • Regular Backups: Implement regular backups.

3. Data Flow Analysis

  • Source Code: Flows from the source code repository (GitHub, GitLab, etc.) to the Jenkins container. Potentially also accessed by SonarQube.

    • Risk: Unauthorized access to source code due to compromised Jenkins or SonarQube instances.
    • Mitigation: Strong authentication and authorization for Jenkins and SonarQube. Secure communication (HTTPS) between the CI tools and the source code repository. Use SSH keys or personal access tokens with limited scope for repository access.

  • Build Artifacts: Generated by Jenkins and potentially stored in an artifact repository (Nexus, Artifactory).

    • Risk: Injection of malicious code into build artifacts. Unauthorized access to build artifacts.
    • Mitigation: Secure configuration of the artifact repository. Use checksums or digital signatures to verify the integrity of build artifacts. Implement access controls to restrict who can upload and download artifacts.

  • Credentials and API Keys: Used by Jenkins to access various services (source code repositories, cloud providers, etc.).

    • Risk: Exposure of credentials due to insecure storage or configuration.
    • Mitigation: Use a secrets management solution (Jenkins Credentials Plugin, HashiCorp Vault). Never store credentials directly in job configurations or scripts. Use environment variables or configuration files that are securely mounted into the containers.

  • Test Results and Code Analysis Reports: Generated by Jenkins and SonarQube.

    • Risk: Exposure of vulnerability information to attackers.
    • Mitigation: Restrict access to these reports to authorized users. Store them securely.

4. Threat Modeling (Specific to docker-ci-tool-stack)

Here are some specific threat scenarios:

  • Scenario 1: Compromised Jenkins Plugin: An attacker exploits a vulnerability in a Jenkins plugin to gain arbitrary code execution on the Jenkins container. The attacker then uses this access to steal source code, credentials, or modify build artifacts.
  • Scenario 2: SonarQube SQL Injection: An attacker exploits a SQL injection vulnerability in SonarQube to gain access to the SonarQube database, potentially extracting sensitive data or modifying code analysis results.
  • Scenario 3: Container Escape: An attacker exploits a vulnerability in Docker or a misconfiguration in the docker-compose.yml file to escape from a container and gain access to the host system.
  • Scenario 4: Supply Chain Attack: An attacker compromises a base Docker image used by the docker-ci-tool-stack. This compromised image is then pulled and used, leading to a compromised CI environment.
  • Scenario 5: Exposed Docker Socket: The Docker socket is accidentally exposed to a container. An attacker within that container uses the socket to gain control of the Docker daemon and launch new containers with elevated privileges.
  • Scenario 6: Unauthenticated Jenkins Access: Jenkins is deployed without authentication enabled. An attacker gains full access to the Jenkins instance and can execute arbitrary commands, steal data, and disrupt builds.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Tailored to docker-ci-tool-stack)

In addition to the mitigations listed for each component, here are some overall strategies:

  • Automated Vulnerability Scanning: Implement automated vulnerability scanning of the Docker images during the build process. Use tools like Trivy, Clair, or Anchore. This is the most critical addition. Integrate this into the GitHub Actions workflow (as suggested in the design review). Fail the build if high-severity vulnerabilities are found.
  • Image Provenance and Integrity:
    • Use official Docker images whenever possible.
    • Use Docker Content Trust to verify the integrity and publisher of Docker images. This helps prevent the use of tampered images.
    • Consider using a private Docker registry to store and manage your own trusted images.
  • Minimal Base Images: Use minimal base images (e.g., Alpine Linux) to reduce the attack surface. This reduces the number of installed packages and potential vulnerabilities.
  • Regular Updates: Automate the process of updating the Docker images to their latest versions. This can be done using tools like Dependabot (for GitHub) or Renovate. This is crucial for patching known vulnerabilities.
  • Security Hardening Guides: Provide clear, step-by-step instructions on how to securely configure each of the included tools. This should include setting strong passwords, enabling authentication, restricting access, and configuring security-related settings.
  • Secrets Management: Emphasize the importance of using a secrets management solution (Jenkins Credentials Plugin, HashiCorp Vault, AWS Secrets Manager, Azure Key Vault, Google Cloud Secret Manager). Provide examples of how to integrate the tool stack with these solutions.
  • Network Policies: Use Docker networks and network policies to restrict communication between containers and between the containers and the outside world. Only allow necessary connections.
  • Monitoring and Logging: Implement monitoring and logging to detect suspicious activity. Collect logs from the Docker containers and the host system. Use a centralized logging solution (e.g., ELK stack, Splunk) to aggregate and analyze logs.
  • Least Privilege for CI/CD User: The user account used to run the CI/CD pipeline (e.g., the GitHub Actions runner) should have the least necessary privileges. Avoid using root or highly privileged accounts.
  • Read-Only Filesystems: Where possible, mount container filesystems as read-only to prevent attackers from modifying installed software. This can be done using the read_only: true option in the docker-compose.yml file.

Specific Code Examples (for GitHub Actions and docker-compose.yml):

GitHub Actions (Vulnerability Scanning with Trivy):

name: Build and Scan

on:
  push:
    branches:
      - main

jobs:
  build-and-scan:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Checkout code
        uses: actions/checkout@v3

      - name: Build Docker image
        run: docker-compose build  # Or your specific build command

      - name: Scan image with Trivy
        uses: aquasecurity/trivy-action@master
        with:
          image-ref: 'your-image-name:latest'  # Replace with your image name
          exit-code: '1'  # Fail the build if vulnerabilities are found
          severity: 'CRITICAL,HIGH'
          ignore-unfixed: true # Consider removing this in production

docker-compose.yml (Resource Limits and Read-Only Filesystems):

version: "3.8"
services:
  jenkins:
    image: jenkins/jenkins:lts
    # ... other configurations ...
    deploy:
      resources:
        limits:
          cpus: '2'
          memory: 4G
    read_only: true # Make the root filesystem read-only
    volumes:
      - jenkins_home:/var/jenkins_home:rw # Mount a volume for persistent data, read-write

  sonarqube:
    image: sonarqube:latest
    # ... other configurations ...
    deploy:
      resources:
        limits:
          cpus: '1'
          memory: 2G
    read_only: true
    volumes:
      - sonarqube_data:/opt/sonarqube/data:rw
      - sonarqube_extensions:/opt/sonarqube/extensions:rw
      - sonarqube_logs:/opt/sonarqube/logs:rw

By implementing these mitigation strategies, the docker-ci-tool-stack project can significantly improve its security posture and reduce the risk of compromise. The most important additions are automated vulnerability scanning, image integrity verification, and robust secrets management. Remember that security is an ongoing process, and regular reviews and updates are essential.