Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
182 lines (145 loc) · 19.2 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

182 lines (145 loc) · 19.2 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for google/guice

Mitigation Strategy: Principle of Least Privilege in Bindings

  • Description:

    1. Review all Guice modules: Systematically examine each Guice module in your application.
    2. Identify binding scopes: For each binding, determine the appropriate Guice scope (e.g., @Singleton, @RequestScoped, @SessionScoped, @Provides with custom scopes). Choose the narrowest scope that fulfills the functional requirements within the Guice context.
    3. Restrict visibility within Guice modules: Use private or package-private modifiers for injected fields and methods in classes managed by Guice where possible. This limits access from outside the intended scope within the Guice-managed components.
    4. Bind to interfaces: Whenever feasible within Guice modules, bind to interfaces rather than concrete implementation classes. This hides implementation details within the Guice configuration and allows for easier substitution and reduced exposure of internal components through Guice.
    5. Avoid overly broad bindings: Refrain from creating Guice bindings that make internal or sensitive components globally accessible throughout the Guice container if they are only needed in specific contexts.
    6. Regularly audit bindings: Periodically review Guice modules to ensure bindings are still necessary and adhere to the principle of least privilege as the application evolves in its dependency injection structure.

    • List of Threats Mitigated:

      • Information Disclosure (Medium Severity): Overly broad Guice bindings can unintentionally expose sensitive internal components or data to parts of the application that should not have access through the dependency injection mechanism.
      • Unauthorized Access (Medium Severity): If internal components with sensitive functionalities are easily accessible due to broad Guice bindings, attackers might exploit vulnerabilities in these components to gain unauthorized access via the Guice-provided dependencies.
      • Increased Attack Surface (Medium Severity): Exposing more components than necessary through Guice bindings increases the overall attack surface of the application as seen through the dependency injection graph, providing more potential entry points for attackers.

    • Impact:

      • Information Disclosure: Risk reduced significantly by limiting unnecessary exposure of internal components through Guice.
      • Unauthorized Access: Risk reduced by making it harder to reach sensitive components through unintended pathways created by Guice bindings.
      • Increased Attack Surface: Risk reduced by minimizing the number of readily accessible components via Guice injection.

    • Currently Implemented:

      • Partially implemented in the UserModule and OrderModule. Bindings for core services like UserService and OrderService are bound to interfaces within Guice modules.
      • Visibility modifiers are used in some classes managed by Guice, but not consistently across the codebase.

    • Missing Implementation:

      • Inconsistent application of visibility modifiers across all injected fields and methods within Guice-managed classes.
      • Some modules still bind directly to concrete classes instead of interfaces in Guice configurations.
      • Lack of regular audits to ensure Guice bindings remain aligned with the principle of least privilege as the application evolves its dependency injection structure.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Configuration of Modules and Bindings

  • Description:

    1. Externalize sensitive configuration used in Guice modules: Identify sensitive configuration data within Guice modules (e.g., database passwords, API keys, connection strings) that are used to configure bindings or providers.
    2. Replace hardcoded values in Guice modules: Remove hardcoded sensitive values from Guice modules.
    3. Utilize external configuration sources for Guice modules: Implement mechanisms to load configuration into Guice modules from secure external sources such as:
      • Environment variables.
      • Configuration files (encrypted if necessary).
      • Dedicated secret management systems (e.g., HashiCorp Vault, AWS Secrets Manager).
    4. Validate configuration values loaded into Guice modules: Implement validation logic within Guice modules to check if loaded configuration values are within expected ranges and formats before using them in bindings or providers. Use libraries like Bean Validation or custom validation logic within the Guice module.
    5. Secure storage of external configuration used by Guice modules: Ensure that external configuration sources accessed by Guice modules are themselves securely managed and accessed with appropriate permissions.
    6. Regularly review configuration of Guice modules: Periodically review Guice modules and external configuration sources used by them to ensure they are still secure and up-to-date.

    • List of Threats Mitigated:

      • Exposure of Sensitive Credentials (High Severity): Hardcoding credentials in Guice modules can lead to accidental exposure in version control systems, logs, or compiled code related to Guice configuration.
      • Configuration Tampering (Medium Severity): If configuration used by Guice modules is not securely managed, attackers might be able to tamper with it to alter application behavior or gain unauthorized access through manipulated Guice bindings or providers.
      • Information Disclosure through Configuration (Medium Severity): Configuration files used by Guice modules, if not properly secured, can become targets for information disclosure.

    • Impact:

      • Exposure of Sensitive Credentials: Risk significantly reduced by removing hardcoded credentials from Guice modules.
      • Configuration Tampering: Risk reduced by using secure external configuration sources and validation for Guice modules.
      • Information Disclosure through Configuration: Risk reduced by securing external configuration storage used by Guice modules.

    • Currently Implemented:

      • Database connection details are partially externalized using environment variables in the production environment for Guice module configuration.
      • API keys are still hardcoded in some Guice modules for development and testing.

    • Missing Implementation:

      • Full externalization of all sensitive configuration data across all environments (development, staging, production) used in Guice modules.
      • Implementation of robust validation for configuration values loaded into Guice modules.
      • Adoption of a dedicated secret management system for production environments to manage secrets used in Guice modules.
      • Consistent use of encrypted configuration files where necessary for Guice module configuration.

Mitigation Strategy: Dependency Management and Vulnerability Scanning for Guice Modules

  • Description:

    1. Create dependency inventory for Guice modules: Maintain a comprehensive list of all direct and transitive dependencies used by your Guice modules. Use dependency management tools (Maven, Gradle) to generate this list.
    2. Integrate vulnerability scanning for Guice module dependencies: Integrate a dependency vulnerability scanning tool (e.g., OWASP Dependency-Check, Snyk, GitHub Dependency Scanning) into your CI/CD pipeline.
    3. Automate scanning of Guice module dependencies: Configure the vulnerability scanner to automatically scan dependencies whenever builds are triggered or on a scheduled basis.
    4. Review scan results for Guice module dependencies: Regularly review the vulnerability scan reports to identify reported vulnerabilities in Guice module dependencies.
    5. Prioritize and remediate vulnerabilities in Guice module dependencies: Prioritize vulnerabilities based on severity and exploitability. Remediate vulnerabilities by:
      • Updating dependencies to patched versions.
      • Finding alternative dependencies without vulnerabilities.
      • Applying workarounds if patches are not immediately available (with caution and temporary measures).
    6. Monitor for new vulnerabilities in Guice module dependencies: Continuously monitor for newly discovered vulnerabilities in dependencies and repeat the remediation process.

    • List of Threats Mitigated:

      • Exploitation of Known Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Using vulnerable dependencies in Guice modules can directly expose the application to known exploits through the Guice dependency graph.
      • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium Severity): Compromised dependencies can introduce malicious code into the application through Guice modules.

    • Impact:

      • Exploitation of Known Vulnerabilities: Risk significantly reduced by proactively identifying and patching vulnerable dependencies used by Guice modules.
      • Supply Chain Attacks: Risk reduced by increasing awareness of dependency vulnerabilities within the Guice module context and promoting timely updates.

    • Currently Implemented:

      • Maven is used for dependency management of Guice modules.
      • GitHub Dependency Scanning is enabled for the repository.

    • Missing Implementation:

      • Integration of a dedicated dependency vulnerability scanning tool into the CI/CD pipeline for build-time checks and reporting specifically for Guice module dependencies.
      • Formal process for reviewing and remediating vulnerability scan results related to Guice module dependencies.
      • Proactive monitoring for new vulnerabilities beyond GitHub Dependency Scanning for Guice module dependencies.

Mitigation Strategy: Careful Use of Custom Scopes and Providers

  • Description:

    1. Minimize custom scopes/providers: Prefer using built-in Guice scopes (@Singleton, @RequestScoped, etc.) whenever possible. Only introduce custom scopes or providers when absolutely necessary and when built-in scopes are insufficient within the Guice framework.
    2. Thoroughly review custom implementations: If custom scopes or providers are required in Guice, carefully review their implementation for potential security implications:
      • State management in custom Guice scopes: Ensure proper state management within custom scopes to avoid unintended data sharing or leaks between requests or users within the Guice-managed context.
      • Thread safety of custom Guice scopes/providers: Verify that custom scopes and providers are thread-safe if they are used in a multi-threaded environment within the Guice application.
      • Resource management in custom Guice scopes: Ensure proper resource management (e.g., closing connections, releasing resources) within custom scopes to prevent resource leaks within the Guice lifecycle.
    3. Test custom scopes/providers: Thoroughly test custom scopes and providers in Guice under various load conditions and scenarios to identify potential issues.
    4. Document custom scopes/providers: Clearly document the behavior, intended use, and security considerations of custom scopes and providers within the Guice configuration for the development team.
    5. Regularly audit custom scopes/providers: Periodically review custom scopes and providers in Guice to ensure they are still necessary and implemented securely as the application evolves its Guice configuration.

    • List of Threats Mitigated:

      • State Management Issues (Medium Severity): Improper state management in custom Guice scopes can lead to data leaks or incorrect behavior, potentially exposing sensitive information or causing functional vulnerabilities within the Guice-managed application.
      • Thread Safety Issues (Medium Severity): Thread safety problems in custom Guice scopes or providers can lead to race conditions and unpredictable behavior, potentially resulting in security vulnerabilities within the Guice context.
      • Resource Leaks (Low to Medium Severity): Resource leaks in custom Guice scopes can lead to resource exhaustion and DoS over time within the Guice application.

    • Impact:

      • State Management Issues: Risk reduced by careful implementation and testing of custom Guice scopes.
      • Thread Safety Issues: Risk reduced by ensuring thread-safe implementations of custom Guice scopes and providers.
      • Resource Leaks: Risk reduced by proper resource management within custom Guice scopes.

    • Currently Implemented:

      • No custom scopes or providers are currently implemented in the project within Guice. Built-in scopes are used.

    • Missing Implementation:

      • Establish guidelines and best practices for when and how to implement custom scopes and providers in Guice if they become necessary in the future.
      • Develop a review process for any future custom scope or provider implementations in Guice to ensure security considerations are addressed.

Mitigation Strategy: Security Audits and Code Reviews Focused on Guice Bindings

  • Description:

    1. Include Guice modules in security audits: Explicitly include Guice modules and binding configurations as a specific focus area in regular security audits.
    2. Train developers on secure Guice practices: Provide training to developers on secure Guice configuration practices, common security pitfalls related to dependency injection specifically within Guice, and the principle of least privilege in bindings within Guice.
    3. Conduct code reviews with security focus on Guice modules: Incorporate security considerations into code reviews, specifically focusing on Guice modules and bindings. Reviewers should check for:
      • Overly broad Guice bindings.
      • Exposure of sensitive components through Guice.
      • Hardcoded credentials in Guice modules.
      • Proper use of Guice scopes and providers.
      • Dependency vulnerabilities of Guice modules.
    4. Use static analysis tools for Guice configuration: Explore and utilize static analysis tools that can understand Guice configurations and identify potential security issues in bindings (while tool support might be limited, general code analysis can still be beneficial for Guice modules).
    5. Document secure Guice practices: Create and maintain documentation outlining secure Guice configuration practices and guidelines for the development team.

    • List of Threats Mitigated:

      • All Guice-related Threats (Varying Severity): Security audits and code reviews act as a general preventative measure against all types of security vulnerabilities that can arise from improper Guice configuration. They help identify and address issues proactively within the Guice framework.

    • Impact:

      • Overall Security Posture: Risk reduced across all Guice-related threat categories by proactively identifying and addressing potential vulnerabilities through audits and reviews of Guice configurations.

    • Currently Implemented:

      • Code reviews are conducted for all code changes, but security aspects related to Guice bindings are not explicitly emphasized.
      • No specific training on secure Guice practices has been provided to developers.

    • Missing Implementation:

      • Formal integration of Guice module security review into the standard code review process.
      • Dedicated security audits specifically focusing on Guice configurations.
      • Training program for developers on secure Guice practices.
      • Exploration and adoption of static analysis tools for Guice configuration security.

Mitigation Strategy: Testing with Different Binding Configurations

  • Description:

    1. Define test configurations for Guice modules: Create different Guice module configurations for testing purposes, including:
      • The intended production Guice configuration.
      • Configurations with intentionally misconfigured or insecure Guice bindings (e.g., overly broad scopes, direct binding to internal classes).
      • Configurations simulating different deployment environments in terms of Guice setup.
    2. Automate configuration switching for Guice modules: Implement mechanisms to easily switch between different Guice module configurations during testing (e.g., using test profiles, configuration flags).
    3. Run integration and security tests with different Guice configurations: Execute integration and security tests against different Guice configurations to assess the application's behavior and resilience to misconfiguration within the Guice framework.
    4. Analyze test results from different Guice configurations: Analyze test results to identify vulnerabilities or unexpected behavior that arise from different binding configurations in Guice.
    5. Improve configuration validation for Guice modules: Based on test results, enhance configuration validation and error handling to prevent insecure Guice configurations from being deployed.

    • List of Threats Mitigated:

      • Configuration Errors Leading to Vulnerabilities (Medium to High Severity): Testing with different Guice configurations helps identify vulnerabilities that might arise from accidental or intentional misconfigurations of Guice bindings.
      • Deployment Environment Issues (Medium Severity): Testing with configurations simulating different environments can reveal environment-specific vulnerabilities related to Guice setup.

    • Impact:

      • Configuration Errors Leading to Vulnerabilities: Risk reduced by proactively identifying and preventing vulnerabilities caused by misconfiguration of Guice modules.
      • Deployment Environment Issues: Risk reduced by ensuring application robustness across different deployment environments in terms of Guice configuration.

    • Currently Implemented:

      • Unit tests are in place, but integration tests with different Guice configurations are not systematically performed.
      • Limited ability to easily switch between different Guice configurations for testing.

    • Missing Implementation:

      • Development of a comprehensive suite of integration tests that run against various Guice configurations.
      • Framework for easily switching between Guice configurations during testing.
      • Automated testing of different deployment environment configurations related to Guice setup.