Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
294 lines (263 loc) · 30.3 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

294 lines (263 loc) · 30.3 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for signalapp/signal-server

Mitigation Strategy: Strict Input Validation on API Endpoints

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Identify all API endpoints within the Signal-Server codebase that handle external input from clients or other services.
    • Step 2: Define and implement robust input validation routines within the Signal-Server application logic for each endpoint. This includes checking data types, formats, lengths, and allowed character sets for all parameters.
    • Step 3: Ensure validation occurs before any data is processed or used in further operations within Signal-Server.
    • Step 4: Implement error handling within Signal-Server to gracefully reject invalid input and return informative error messages to clients (without revealing sensitive server-side details).
    • Step 5: Regularly review and update validation rules within Signal-Server as API endpoints are modified or new ones are added.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Injection Attacks (SQL Injection, Command Injection, LDAP Injection - Medium to High Severity): Malicious code injected through API inputs can be executed by Signal-Server.
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (Medium Severity): Malicious scripts injected through API inputs could be stored and potentially reflected back to clients in certain scenarios (though less direct in Signal's architecture, metadata handling could be a vector).
    • Data Corruption (Medium Severity): Invalid input can lead to data inconsistencies or application errors within Signal-Server's data storage.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Low to Medium Severity): Malformed input could be crafted to crash Signal-Server or consume excessive resources.
  • Impact:
    • Injection Attacks: High reduction in risk.
    • Cross-Site Scripting: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Data Corruption: High reduction in risk.
    • Denial of Service: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Partially implemented within Signal-Server. Likely some validation exists, especially for core functionalities. The extent and thoroughness need to be assessed by reviewing the Signal-Server codebase.
  • Missing Implementation: Potentially missing comprehensive validation across all API endpoints and input parameters within Signal-Server. A systematic review of the codebase to identify and implement missing validation is needed.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Handling of Phone Numbers and User Identifiers within Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Within the Signal-Server codebase, treat phone numbers and other user identifiers as highly sensitive data.
    • Step 2: Implement access control mechanisms within Signal-Server's internal logic to restrict access to phone number data. Ensure only necessary modules and functions can access this information.
    • Step 3: If phone numbers are stored within Signal-Server's database, ensure they are encrypted at rest by Signal-Server's data access layer. Use strong encryption algorithms and manage keys securely within the server environment.
    • Step 4: When passing phone numbers between internal components of Signal-Server, use secure in-memory data structures or encrypted channels where appropriate.
    • Step 5: Minimize logging of full phone numbers within Signal-Server's logs. Use anonymized or hashed representations in logs for debugging and auditing purposes where possible.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Privacy Breaches (High Severity): Unauthorized access to phone numbers within Signal-Server can lead to data leaks.
    • Identity Theft (Medium to High Severity): Compromised phone numbers from Signal-Server could be used for malicious purposes.
    • Account Takeover (Medium Severity): If phone number handling within Signal-Server is flawed, it could be exploited for account takeover.
  • Impact:
    • Privacy Breaches: High reduction in risk.
    • Identity Theft: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Account Takeover: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely partially implemented within Signal-Server, given Signal's privacy focus. However, a detailed code review is needed to confirm the robustness of phone number handling.
  • Missing Implementation: May need to strengthen encryption at rest specifically within Signal-Server's data handling. Review and refine access control mechanisms within the codebase for phone number data. Audit logging practices within Signal-Server to minimize phone number exposure.

Mitigation Strategy: Rate Limiting on Registration and Verification Endpoints within Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Implement rate limiting logic directly within the Signal-Server application code for registration and phone number verification API endpoints.
    • Step 2: Configure rate limits within Signal-Server's settings or configuration files. Define limits based on factors like IP address, session identifiers, or other relevant criteria.
    • Step 3: When rate limits are exceeded, Signal-Server should reject requests and return appropriate HTTP status codes (e.g., 429) to clients.
    • Step 4: Implement mechanisms within Signal-Server to track and monitor rate limiting effectiveness and adjust limits as needed.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Spam Account Creation (Medium Severity): Prevents automated mass registration of spam accounts through Signal-Server's API.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Medium Severity): Reduces the impact of DoS attacks specifically targeting Signal-Server's registration and verification processes.
    • Brute-Force Attacks on Verification Codes (Medium Severity): Makes brute-forcing verification codes via Signal-Server's API more difficult.
  • Impact:
    • Spam Account Creation: High reduction in risk.
    • Denial of Service: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Brute-Force Attacks on Verification Codes: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely implemented within Signal-Server. Rate limiting is a standard practice for these types of endpoints and is crucial for Signal-Server's operational stability.
  • Missing Implementation: Rate limiting configurations within Signal-Server might need to be reviewed and fine-tuned. Consideration for more advanced rate limiting techniques within the application could be explored.

Mitigation Strategy: Strong TLS Configuration for Signal-Server's Web Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Configure the web server component (e.g., embedded or external web server used by Signal-Server) to enforce strong TLS settings for all HTTPS connections to Signal-Server.
    • Step 2: Within the web server configuration, enforce TLS 1.3 (or TLS 1.2 minimum).
    • Step 3: Select strong and modern cipher suites in the web server configuration that prioritize forward secrecy and are resistant to known attacks.
    • Step 4: Disable insecure TLS protocols and weak cipher suites in the web server configuration.
    • Step 5: Regularly review and update TLS configurations of the web server used by Signal-Server to maintain best practices.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks (High Severity): Prevents eavesdropping on communication between clients and Signal-Server.
    • Data Eavesdropping (High Severity): Protects sensitive data transmitted to and from Signal-Server over the network.
    • Data Tampering (High Severity): Ensures data integrity during transmission to and from Signal-Server.
  • Impact:
    • Man-in-the-Middle Attacks: High reduction in risk.
    • Data Eavesdropping: High reduction in risk.
    • Data Tampering: High reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Highly likely implemented for the web server component of Signal-Server. Strong TLS is essential for secure communication.
  • Missing Implementation: Regularly audit the web server's TLS configuration used by Signal-Server. Automate checks for TLS configuration drift and vulnerabilities in the web server setup.

Mitigation Strategy: Regular Security Patching and Dependency Updates for Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Establish a process for regularly monitoring security advisories and vulnerability databases specifically for the Signal-Server project and its direct dependencies (libraries, frameworks used by Signal-Server).
    • Step 2: Implement automated dependency scanning tools to identify outdated or vulnerable components within the Signal-Server project.
    • Step 3: Prioritize and promptly apply security patches and updates released by the Signal-Server project maintainers and for its dependencies.
    • Step 4: Test patches in a staging environment of Signal-Server before deploying to production.
    • Step 5: Maintain a clear inventory of all software components and their versions within the Signal-Server deployment to facilitate patch management.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Exploitation of Known Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Prevents attackers from exploiting known vulnerabilities in Signal-Server code or its dependencies.
    • Zero-Day Attacks (Medium Severity): Reduces the window of opportunity for exploitation after a vulnerability in Signal-Server or its dependencies is disclosed.
    • System Compromise (High Severity): Unpatched vulnerabilities in Signal-Server can lead to server compromise.
  • Impact:
    • Exploitation of Known Vulnerabilities: High reduction in risk.
    • Zero-Day Attacks: Medium reduction in risk.
    • System Compromise: High reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely implemented to some extent for Signal-Server. Staying up-to-date is crucial for any software project.
  • Missing Implementation: Implement automated dependency scanning specifically for the Signal-Server project. Formalize a patch management process for Signal-Server with defined SLAs. Regularly audit the patch management process for Signal-Server.

Mitigation Strategy: Comprehensive Logging and Security Monitoring within Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Configure Signal-Server itself to generate detailed logs of security-relevant events (authentication attempts, API requests, errors, access control decisions, security alerts within the application).
    • Step 2: Implement mechanisms within Signal-Server to output logs in a structured format suitable for analysis.
    • Step 3: Integrate Signal-Server's logs with a centralized logging and security monitoring system (SIEM) for real-time analysis and alerting.
    • Step 4: Define security monitoring rules and alerts based on Signal-Server's logs to detect suspicious activities and potential incidents.
    • Step 5: Regularly review Signal-Server logs for security analysis and proactive threat hunting.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Delayed Incident Detection (High Severity): Enables faster detection of security incidents affecting Signal-Server.
    • Insufficient Incident Response (Medium to High Severity): Provides crucial log data for investigating security incidents related to Signal-Server.
    • Lack of Visibility into Security Posture (Medium Severity): Improves visibility into Signal-Server's security status and operational behavior.
    • Insider Threats (Medium Severity): Logs from Signal-Server can help detect and investigate malicious insider activity.
  • Impact:
    • Delayed Incident Detection: High reduction in risk.
    • Insufficient Incident Response: High reduction in risk.
    • Lack of Visibility into Security Posture: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Insider Threats: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely partially implemented within Signal-Server. Logging is a standard practice, but the security focus and integration with monitoring systems need verification.
  • Missing Implementation: Ensure comprehensive security-focused logging is enabled within Signal-Server. Integrate Signal-Server logs with a SIEM. Develop specific security monitoring rules tailored to Signal-Server's potential threats.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Device Linking and Management within Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Review and strengthen the device linking mechanism implemented in Signal-Server. Ensure it uses strong cryptographic protocols and secure authentication methods.
    • Step 2: Implement robust authorization checks within Signal-Server to verify device linking requests and prevent unauthorized device additions.
    • Step 3: Provide users with clear visibility and control over their linked devices through Signal-Server's account management features. Allow users to easily review and revoke linked devices.
    • Step 4: Implement security audits and logging within Signal-Server related to device linking and management events.
    • Step 5: Regularly review and test the device linking implementation in Signal-Server for potential vulnerabilities.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Unauthorized Device Linking (Medium to High Severity): Prevents attackers from linking their devices to legitimate user accounts without authorization.
    • Account Takeover (Medium to High Severity): Weak device linking can be exploited for account takeover.
    • Data Access by Unauthorized Devices (High Severity): Compromised device linking can lead to unauthorized access to user data.
  • Impact:
    • Unauthorized Device Linking: High reduction in risk.
    • Account Takeover: High reduction in risk.
    • Data Access by Unauthorized Devices: High reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely implemented with security considerations in Signal-Server, as device linking is a core feature. However, the robustness needs to be verified.
  • Missing Implementation: Conduct a thorough security review and penetration testing of the device linking implementation in Signal-Server. Enhance user visibility and control over linked devices through Signal-Server's account management features.

Mitigation Strategy: Robust Session Management within Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Implement secure session management practices within Signal-Server.
    • Step 2: Use strong, cryptographically secure session identifiers generated by Signal-Server.
    • Step 3: Store session data securely within Signal-Server's session management system. Protect session data from unauthorized access.
    • Step 4: Set appropriate session timeouts within Signal-Server to limit the lifespan of sessions.
    • Step 5: Implement mechanisms for session invalidation and revocation within Signal-Server, allowing users to log out and administrators to terminate sessions if needed.
    • Step 6: Protect session identifiers from exposure in URLs or client-side storage where possible. Use HTTP-only and Secure flags for session cookies if cookies are used.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Session Hijacking (High Severity): Prevents attackers from stealing or hijacking user sessions to gain unauthorized access.
    • Account Takeover (High Severity): Weak session management can be exploited for account takeover.
    • Unauthorized Access (High Severity): Compromised sessions can lead to unauthorized access to user data and functionality.
  • Impact:
    • Session Hijacking: High reduction in risk.
    • Account Takeover: High reduction in risk.
    • Unauthorized Access: High reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely implemented with security in mind within Signal-Server. Secure session management is fundamental for web applications.
  • Missing Implementation: Review and audit the session management implementation within Signal-Server for best practices. Ensure strong session identifier generation, secure storage, appropriate timeouts, and session invalidation mechanisms are in place.

Mitigation Strategy: Principle of Least Privilege for Signal-Server Components

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Analyze the architecture of Signal-Server and identify its different components and processes.
    • Step 2: Apply the principle of least privilege when configuring permissions and access rights for each component and process within the Signal-Server environment.
    • Step 3: Ensure that each component only has the minimum necessary permissions to perform its intended function.
    • Step 4: Restrict access to sensitive resources (e.g., databases, configuration files, cryptographic keys) within the Signal-Server environment to only authorized components.
    • Step 5: Regularly review and audit permissions and access controls within Signal-Server to ensure they adhere to the principle of least privilege.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Lateral Movement (Medium to High Severity): Limits the impact of a compromise in one Signal-Server component by restricting its access to other components and resources.
    • Privilege Escalation (Medium Severity): Makes it harder for an attacker who compromises a low-privilege component to escalate privileges and gain broader access.
    • Data Breaches (Medium to High Severity): Reduces the potential scope of a data breach if a component is compromised, as access to sensitive data is restricted.
  • Impact:
    • Lateral Movement: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Privilege Escalation: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Data Breaches: Medium to High reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely partially implemented in the design of Signal-Server. Good software architecture often incorporates least privilege principles.
  • Missing Implementation: Conduct a thorough review of component permissions and access controls within the Signal-Server deployment. Harden component configurations to enforce least privilege. Automate checks to detect deviations from least privilege configurations.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Media Handling within Signal-Server (If Applicable)

  • Description:
    • Step 1: If your deployment of Signal-Server handles media uploads directly (though typically clients handle direct media transfer), implement secure media handling practices within Signal-Server.
    • Step 2: Implement checks within Signal-Server to validate uploaded media file types and sizes. Restrict allowed file types to prevent malicious uploads. Enforce file size limits.
    • Step 3: Sanitize or transcode uploaded media files within Signal-Server to remove potential embedded threats (e.g., malware, exploits).
    • Step 4: Store uploaded media files securely in a dedicated storage location accessible to Signal-Server. Implement access controls to restrict access to media files.
    • Step 5: Implement virus scanning or malware detection within Signal-Server's media handling pipeline to scan uploaded files for malicious content.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Malware Uploads (High Severity): Prevents users from uploading and distributing malware through Signal-Server.
    • Exploitable File Formats (Medium to High Severity): Mitigates risks associated with processing complex file formats that may have vulnerabilities.
    • Storage Exhaustion (Medium Severity): File size limits prevent denial-of-service through excessive media uploads.
  • Impact:
    • Malware Uploads: High reduction in risk.
    • Exploitable File Formats: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Storage Exhaustion: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Implementation depends on whether your Signal-Server deployment handles media uploads directly. If so, some basic checks might be present, but thorough security measures need to be verified.
  • Missing Implementation: If media handling is part of your Signal-Server deployment, implement comprehensive media validation, sanitization, malware scanning, and secure storage practices within Signal-Server.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Dependency Resolution for Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Implement secure dependency resolution practices for building and deploying Signal-Server.
    • Step 2: Use trusted and official package repositories for downloading Signal-Server dependencies.
    • Step 3: Verify the integrity of downloaded dependencies using checksums or digital signatures to prevent tampering.
    • Step 4: Use dependency pinning or version locking to ensure consistent and reproducible builds of Signal-Server and prevent unexpected dependency updates.
    • Step 5: Regularly audit and review Signal-Server's dependency list for outdated or vulnerable components.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium to High Severity): Prevents attackers from compromising Signal-Server by injecting malicious code through compromised dependencies.
    • Dependency Confusion Attacks (Medium Severity): Mitigates risks of accidentally using malicious or unintended dependencies.
    • Vulnerability Introduction (Medium to High Severity): Ensures that Signal-Server is built with secure and up-to-date dependencies.
  • Impact:
    • Supply Chain Attacks: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Dependency Confusion Attacks: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Vulnerability Introduction: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely partially implemented in the Signal-Server build process. Secure dependency management is a standard software development practice.
  • Missing Implementation: Formalize and strengthen the secure dependency resolution process for Signal-Server. Implement automated checks for dependency integrity and vulnerability scanning in the build pipeline.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Code Reviews for Signal-Server Code Changes

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Implement mandatory secure code reviews for all code changes made to the Signal-Server codebase.
    • Step 2: Train developers on secure coding practices and common security vulnerabilities relevant to Signal-Server.
    • Step 3: Ensure code reviews are performed by developers with security awareness and expertise.
    • Step 4: Use code review checklists or guidelines that include security considerations specific to Signal-Server.
    • Step 5: Document and track security findings from code reviews and ensure they are addressed before code is merged.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Introduction of Vulnerabilities (Medium to High Severity): Prevents developers from unintentionally introducing security vulnerabilities into the Signal-Server codebase.
    • Logic Errors and Design Flaws (Medium Severity): Code reviews can identify logic errors and design flaws that could have security implications.
    • Missed Security Best Practices (Medium Severity): Ensures adherence to secure coding best practices within the Signal-Server project.
  • Impact:
    • Introduction of Vulnerabilities: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Logic Errors and Design Flaws: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Missed Security Best Practices: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely implemented to some extent within the Signal-Server development process, especially for a security-focused project.
  • Missing Implementation: Formalize secure code review processes for Signal-Server. Provide specific security training to developers focused on Signal-Server vulnerabilities. Implement security-focused code review checklists.

Mitigation Strategy: Security Testing in Signal-Server Development Pipeline

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Integrate security testing into the Signal-Server development pipeline (CI/CD).
    • Step 2: Implement Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools to automatically scan Signal-Server code for potential vulnerabilities during development.
    • Step 3: Implement Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tools to test running instances of Signal-Server for vulnerabilities from an external perspective.
    • Step 4: Include penetration testing as part of the security testing process for Signal-Server, either automated or manual.
    • Step 5: Define clear thresholds and policies for security testing failures in the pipeline. Ensure that builds fail if critical vulnerabilities are detected.
    • Step 6: Track and remediate security vulnerabilities identified by testing tools and penetration testing.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Unidentified Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Proactively identifies security vulnerabilities in Signal-Server before they are deployed to production.
    • Regression of Security Fixes (Medium Severity): Ensures that security fixes are not accidentally regressed in future code changes.
    • Late Detection of Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Shifts security testing earlier in the development lifecycle, reducing the cost and effort of remediation.
  • Impact:
    • Unidentified Vulnerabilities: High reduction in risk.
    • Regression of Security Fixes: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Late Detection of Vulnerabilities: High reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely partially implemented for Signal-Server. Security testing is becoming increasingly common in software development.
  • Missing Implementation: Implement comprehensive SAST and DAST tools in the Signal-Server development pipeline. Integrate penetration testing into the pipeline. Define clear security testing policies and thresholds.

Mitigation Strategy: Security Training for Signal-Server Development Team

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Provide regular security training to the Signal-Server development team.
    • Step 2: Tailor training content to focus on security vulnerabilities and best practices relevant to Signal-Server and its technology stack.
    • Step 3: Include training on common web application vulnerabilities (OWASP Top 10), secure coding principles, and privacy considerations specific to messaging platforms.
    • Step 4: Conduct hands-on security training exercises and workshops to reinforce learning.
    • Step 5: Keep training materials up-to-date with the latest security threats and best practices.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Human Error in Code (Medium to High Severity): Reduces the likelihood of developers making security mistakes due to lack of awareness or knowledge.
    • Introduction of Vulnerabilities (Medium to High Severity): Equips developers with the skills to write more secure code and avoid introducing vulnerabilities.
    • Slow Adoption of Security Best Practices (Medium Severity): Promotes a security-conscious culture within the development team and encourages the adoption of security best practices.
  • Impact:
    • Human Error in Code: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Introduction of Vulnerabilities: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Slow Adoption of Security Best Practices: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely implemented to some degree for the Signal-Server development team, especially given the project's security focus.
  • Missing Implementation: Formalize a regular security training program for the Signal-Server development team. Develop tailored training content specific to Signal-Server and messaging platform security. Track training completion and effectiveness.

Mitigation Strategy: Rate Limiting on API Endpoints (General) within Signal-Server

  • Description:
    • Step 1: Implement rate limiting within the Signal-Server application code for all public API endpoints, not just registration and verification.
    • Step 2: Configure rate limits within Signal-Server based on API endpoint functionality and expected traffic patterns.
    • Step 3: Use different rate limits for different API endpoints based on their criticality and resource consumption.
    • Step 4: When rate limits are exceeded, Signal-Server should reject requests and return appropriate HTTP status codes (e.g., 429).
    • Step 5: Monitor rate limiting effectiveness within Signal-Server and adjust limits as needed.
  • List of Threats Mitigated:
    • Denial of Service (DoS) (Medium to High Severity): Protects Signal-Server from DoS attacks targeting various API endpoints.
    • Resource Exhaustion (Medium Severity): Prevents excessive API requests from overwhelming Signal-Server resources.
    • Brute-Force Attacks (Medium Severity): Makes brute-force attacks against API endpoints more difficult.
    • API Abuse (Medium Severity): Limits the potential for malicious or unintended abuse of Signal-Server's APIs.
  • Impact:
    • Denial of Service: Medium to High reduction in risk.
    • Resource Exhaustion: Medium reduction in risk.
    • Brute-Force Attacks: Medium reduction in risk.
    • API Abuse: Medium reduction in risk.
  • Currently Implemented: Likely partially implemented within Signal-Server, especially for critical endpoints. General API rate limiting is a common security practice.
  • Missing Implementation: Extend rate limiting to all public API endpoints within Signal-Server. Fine-tune rate limits for different endpoints based on their function and resource usage. Implement monitoring and alerting for rate limiting events within Signal-Server.