Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
80 lines (69 loc) · 10.1 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

80 lines (69 loc) · 10.1 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for hibernate/hibernate-orm

Attack Surface: Query Language Injection (HQL/JPQL/Native SQL Injection)

Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities in query construction to inject malicious code into database queries via Hibernate's query languages.

  • Hibernate-ORM Contribution: Hibernate provides HQL, JPQL, and native SQL, all of which can be vulnerable if user input is incorporated into queries without proper parameterization. Hibernate's query execution mechanisms then process these potentially malicious queries.
  • Example:
    • Scenario: An application uses JPQL to search for products by name. User input is directly concatenated into the JPQL query.
    • Vulnerable JPQL: entityManager.createQuery("SELECT p FROM Product p WHERE p.name LIKE '" + userInput + "%'").getResultList();
    • Malicious Input: ' OR 1=1 --
    • Resulting JPQL (after injection): SELECT p FROM Product p WHERE p.name LIKE '' OR 1=1 --%' - This query bypasses the intended search and could return all products or be further manipulated for more severe attacks.
  • Impact: Data breach, data manipulation, privilege escalation, denial of service.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Mandatory Parameterized Queries: Enforce the use of parameterized queries or named parameters for all HQL, JPQL, and native SQL queries. This is the primary defense.
    • Strict Input Validation: Implement robust input validation to sanitize user-provided data before it's used in any query, even with parameterization as a defense-in-depth measure.
    • Least Privilege Database Access: Configure database user permissions to follow the principle of least privilege, limiting the impact of successful injection attacks.

Attack Surface: Deserialization Vulnerabilities (Especially with Caching)

Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities during the deserialization process of objects managed by Hibernate, particularly within the second-level cache, potentially leading to remote code execution.

  • Hibernate-ORM Contribution: Hibernate's second-level cache serializes and deserializes objects for performance. If insecure serialization methods are used or vulnerable libraries are involved in this process, Hibernate becomes a conduit for deserialization attacks.
  • Example:
    • Scenario: Hibernate is configured to use a second-level cache that utilizes Java's default serialization. A known deserialization vulnerability exists in a library present in the application's classpath.
    • Attack Vector: An attacker crafts a malicious serialized object and finds a way to inject it into the cache (e.g., through a vulnerability in the cache mechanism or by manipulating data that gets cached).
    • Hibernate Deserialization Trigger: When Hibernate retrieves this poisoned object from the cache and deserializes it, the malicious code within the object is executed on the server.
  • Impact: Remote code execution, denial of service, complete server compromise.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Avoid Insecure Serialization: Strongly discourage the use of Java's default serialization for Hibernate's second-level cache. Prefer safer alternatives like JSON or Protocol Buffers.
    • Secure Deserialization Libraries: If Java serialization is unavoidable, meticulously ensure all libraries involved in serialization/deserialization are up-to-date and patched against known deserialization vulnerabilities.
    • Object Input Filtering (Deserialization): Implement object input filtering during deserialization to restrict the types of objects that can be deserialized, preventing the instantiation of potentially malicious classes.

Attack Surface: Configuration and Mapping Vulnerabilities

Description: Exploiting insecure configurations or practices within Hibernate's configuration and entity mapping definitions.

  • Hibernate-ORM Contribution: Hibernate's behavior is heavily dictated by configuration files (hibernate.cfg.xml, persistence.xml) and mapping files/annotations. Misconfigurations directly weaken Hibernate's security posture and can expose vulnerabilities.
  • Example:
    • Scenario: Database credentials are hardcoded directly within hibernate.cfg.xml and this file is inadvertently exposed through a misconfigured deployment or version control system.
    • Exposed Credentials: An attacker gains access to the configuration file and extracts the database username and password.
    • Direct Database Access: The attacker uses these credentials to directly access the database, bypassing application-level security and potentially gaining full control over the data.
  • Impact: Data breach, data manipulation, information disclosure, potential for complete database compromise.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Externalize Sensitive Configuration: Never hardcode sensitive information like database credentials in configuration files. Utilize environment variables, system properties, or dedicated secret management systems to manage these securely.
    • Secure File Permissions (Configuration): Restrict file system permissions on configuration and mapping files to prevent unauthorized access.
    • Configuration Validation and Auditing: Implement automated validation checks for configuration files to detect insecure settings. Regularly audit configurations for potential vulnerabilities.
    • Secure Deployment Pipelines: Ensure secure deployment practices to prevent accidental exposure of configuration files during deployment processes.

Attack Surface: Dialect and Database-Specific Vulnerabilities

Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities that arise from database-specific SQL syntax differences and potential bugs or inconsistencies within Hibernate's dialect implementations.

  • Hibernate-ORM Contribution: Hibernate's dialect system is designed to abstract database differences, but subtle bugs or incomplete abstractions in dialects can create database-specific vulnerabilities, especially in SQL injection contexts.
  • Example:
    • Scenario: A specific version of a Hibernate dialect for a particular database has a bug in how it handles certain escape characters or SQL syntax when translating parameterized queries.
    • Dialect Bug Exploitation: An attacker crafts input that exploits this dialect-specific bug, potentially bypassing parameterized query protections and achieving SQL injection on that specific database system.
  • Impact: Database-specific SQL injection, data breach, data manipulation, application errors.
  • Risk Severity: High (due to potential for SQL injection bypass)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Maintain Up-to-Date Hibernate: Keep Hibernate ORM updated to the latest stable version to benefit from bug fixes and security patches in dialects.
    • Database-Specific Testing and Validation: Conduct thorough security testing against the specific database version and Hibernate dialect used in production, paying close attention to query behavior and edge cases.
    • Database Security Hardening: Implement database-level security hardening measures in addition to Hibernate-level security practices.
    • Monitor Dialect Security Advisories: Stay informed about security advisories related to Hibernate dialects and the specific database systems in use.

Attack Surface: Interceptor and Listener Vulnerabilities

Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities introduced through insecurely implemented custom Hibernate Interceptors and Listeners.

  • Hibernate-ORM Contribution: Hibernate's Interceptors and Listeners provide extension points to customize Hibernate's behavior. If these custom components are not developed with security in mind, they can become significant attack vectors within the Hibernate ORM layer.
  • Example:
    • Scenario: A custom Hibernate Interceptor is implemented to log entity changes. The logging logic is poorly written and vulnerable to log injection or information disclosure.
    • Vulnerable Interceptor Logic: The interceptor directly includes sensitive entity data in log messages without proper sanitization or access control, potentially logging sensitive information to insecure logs or allowing log injection attacks.
    • Information Disclosure/Log Injection: An attacker manipulates data to be persisted, causing the vulnerable interceptor to log sensitive information or inject malicious content into log files, which could be exploited later.
  • Impact: Information disclosure, log injection, potential for code execution if interceptor logic is severely flawed, data manipulation.
  • Risk Severity: High (depending on the privileges and complexity of interceptor/listener logic)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Interceptor/Listener Development: Develop custom interceptors and listeners with a strong focus on security. Follow secure coding practices, avoid insecure operations, and implement proper input validation and output encoding within these components.
    • Principle of Least Privilege (Interceptors/Listeners): Limit the functionality and privileges granted to custom interceptors and listeners to the absolute minimum required for their intended purpose.
    • Rigorous Code Review and Security Testing: Subject custom interceptor and listener code to thorough code reviews and security testing to identify and remediate potential vulnerabilities.
    • Secure Logging Practices (within Interceptors/Listeners): Implement secure logging practices within interceptors and listeners to prevent log injection and information leakage. Sanitize data before logging and control access to log files.