Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
79 lines (66 loc) · 10 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

79 lines (66 loc) · 10 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for netflix/asgard

Attack Surface: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in Asgard UI

  • Description: Attackers inject malicious scripts into the Asgard web interface, which are then executed in other users' browsers when they view the affected pages.
  • Asgard Contribution: Asgard's UI displays dynamic content, including application names, logs, configuration details, and user inputs. If this data is not properly sanitized before rendering in the browser, XSS vulnerabilities can arise.
  • Example: An attacker injects a malicious JavaScript payload into an application name field during deployment. When an administrator views the application details in Asgard, the script executes, potentially stealing their session cookie and granting the attacker access to Asgard.
  • Impact: Session hijacking, credential theft, defacement of Asgard UI, redirection to malicious sites, further compromise of AWS environment if Asgard session is used to manage infrastructure.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Input Validation: Strictly validate all user inputs to Asgard, especially those that will be displayed in the UI.
    • Output Encoding: Encode all dynamic content before rendering it in the browser. Use context-aware encoding (e.g., HTML entity encoding for HTML context, JavaScript encoding for JavaScript context).
    • Content Security Policy (CSP): Implement a strong CSP to restrict the sources from which the browser is allowed to load resources, mitigating the impact of XSS even if it occurs.
    • Regular Security Scanning: Use automated security scanners to identify potential XSS vulnerabilities in Asgard's UI.

Attack Surface: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in Asgard UI

  • Description: Attackers trick authenticated Asgard users into unknowingly sending malicious requests to the Asgard server, performing actions on their behalf.
  • Asgard Contribution: Asgard's UI allows users to perform actions that modify infrastructure state in AWS (deployments, scaling, terminations). Without CSRF protection, these actions can be triggered by unauthorized requests originating from malicious websites.
  • Example: An attacker crafts a malicious website containing a hidden form that, when visited by an authenticated Asgard user, sends a request to Asgard to terminate a critical application instance. If Asgard lacks CSRF protection, this request will be executed as if it came from the legitimate user.
  • Impact: Unauthorized modification of AWS infrastructure, denial of service, data breaches if configurations are altered to expose sensitive information.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • CSRF Tokens: Implement CSRF tokens (synchronizer tokens) for all state-changing requests in Asgard. Ensure tokens are properly generated, validated on the server-side, and securely handled.
    • SameSite Cookie Attribute: Utilize the SameSite cookie attribute for session cookies to prevent browsers from sending session cookies with cross-site requests in certain scenarios.
    • Double-Submit Cookie Pattern: Consider the double-submit cookie pattern as an alternative or supplementary CSRF protection mechanism.

Attack Surface: Overly Permissive IAM Roles for Asgard

  • Description: The IAM role assigned to the EC2 instance or service running Asgard grants excessive permissions to AWS resources beyond what is strictly necessary for Asgard's functionality.
  • Asgard Contribution: Asgard needs to interact with various AWS services (EC2, ELB, ASG, etc.) to manage applications. If the IAM role is configured with broad permissions (e.g., AdministratorAccess), a compromise of Asgard can lead to a much wider compromise of the AWS environment.
  • Example: Asgard's IAM role has ec2:* permissions. An attacker compromises Asgard through an XSS vulnerability. They can then leverage Asgard's IAM role to launch new EC2 instances, access S3 buckets, or modify other AWS resources, going far beyond application management.
  • Impact: Full compromise of the AWS account, data breaches, resource hijacking, denial of service across multiple AWS services.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Principle of Least Privilege: Strictly adhere to the principle of least privilege when configuring Asgard's IAM role. Grant only the minimum necessary permissions required for Asgard to function correctly.
    • Granular IAM Policies: Create specific IAM policies that narrowly define the allowed actions and resources for Asgard. Avoid wildcard permissions (e.g., ec2:*).
    • Regular IAM Role Review: Periodically review and refine Asgard's IAM role to ensure it remains aligned with the principle of least privilege and evolving security best practices.
    • IAM Policy Simulator: Use the AWS IAM Policy Simulator to test and validate IAM policies before deploying them to ensure they grant only the intended permissions.

Attack Surface: Insecure Configuration Storage

  • Description: Asgard's configuration files or databases, which store sensitive information like database credentials, API keys, or internal settings, are not adequately secured.
  • Asgard Contribution: Asgard relies on configuration to define application deployments, connect to databases, and interact with AWS. If this configuration is stored insecurely, it becomes a prime target for attackers.
  • Example: Database credentials for Asgard's internal database are stored in plaintext in a configuration file accessible to the web server user. An attacker gains access to the web server through a vulnerability and retrieves the configuration file, obtaining database credentials and potentially compromising Asgard's data.
  • Impact: Data breaches, unauthorized access to Asgard's internal data, potential for further system compromise if database access is leveraged.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Encrypt Sensitive Data: Encrypt sensitive data at rest in configuration files and databases. Use encryption mechanisms appropriate for the storage medium (e.g., database encryption, file system encryption).
    • Secure Access Controls: Implement strong access controls on configuration files and databases. Restrict access to only authorized users and processes.
    • Externalized Configuration Management: Consider using externalized configuration management solutions (e.g., HashiCorp Vault, AWS Secrets Manager) to store and manage sensitive configuration data securely, rather than directly embedding it in Asgard's configuration files.
    • Regular Security Audits: Conduct regular security audits of Asgard's configuration storage mechanisms to identify and address any vulnerabilities.

Attack Surface: Vulnerable Dependencies

  • Description: Asgard relies on third-party libraries and frameworks that may contain known security vulnerabilities.
  • Asgard Contribution: Asgard is built using Java and other open-source components. Vulnerabilities in these dependencies can directly impact Asgard's security. Outdated or unpatched dependencies are a common attack vector.
  • Example: Asgard uses an older version of a web framework with a known remote code execution vulnerability. An attacker exploits this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code on the server running Asgard, gaining full control of the system.
  • Impact: Remote code execution, denial of service, data breaches, full system compromise.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Dependency Scanning: Implement automated dependency scanning tools to identify known vulnerabilities in Asgard's dependencies.
    • Regular Dependency Updates: Keep Asgard's dependencies up-to-date by regularly patching and upgrading to the latest stable versions.
    • Vulnerability Management Process: Establish a robust vulnerability management process to track, prioritize, and remediate identified vulnerabilities in a timely manner.
    • Software Composition Analysis (SCA): Utilize SCA tools to gain visibility into Asgard's software bill of materials and identify potential risks associated with open-source components.

Attack Surface: Insecure API Communication with AWS

  • Description: Communication between Asgard and AWS APIs is not properly secured, potentially allowing for man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks.
  • Asgard Contribution: Asgard heavily relies on AWS APIs to manage infrastructure. If this communication is not encrypted or authenticated properly, it becomes vulnerable to interception and manipulation.
  • Example: Asgard communicates with AWS APIs over HTTP instead of HTTPS. An attacker on the network intercepts API requests and responses, gaining access to AWS credentials being transmitted or manipulating API calls to alter infrastructure state.
  • Impact: Credential theft, unauthorized access to AWS resources, manipulation of AWS infrastructure, data breaches.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • HTTPS for API Communication: Ensure all communication between Asgard and AWS APIs is conducted over HTTPS to encrypt data in transit and prevent MITM attacks.
    • AWS Signature Version 4: Utilize AWS Signature Version 4 for API requests to ensure request integrity and authenticity. This is generally handled by AWS SDKs.
    • Network Segmentation: Isolate Asgard within a secure network segment and restrict network access to only necessary services and ports.
    • Regular Security Audits: Audit network configurations and communication protocols to ensure secure API communication practices are in place.