Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
58 lines (48 loc) · 6.53 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

58 lines (48 loc) · 6.53 KB

Threat Model Analysis for teamnewpipe/newpipe

Threat: Service API Changes (Breaking Changes)

1. Threat: Service API Changes (Breaking Changes)

  • Description: The target service (e.g., YouTube) modifies its API or website structure without warning. The attacker (the service provider) changes endpoints, data formats, or HTML element IDs/classes used by the extractor to locate information. This is done intentionally to improve their service, combat scraping, or for other business reasons. This directly impacts NewPipe Extractor's ability to function.
  • Impact: The application using NewPipe Extractor fails to retrieve data, resulting in a denial of service for the application's core functionality. Users cannot access content.
  • NewPipe Component Affected:
    • Extractor (base class) - General failure to extract any data.
    • Specific service extractors (e.g., YoutubeStreamExtractor, SoundcloudStreamExtractor) - Failure within the specific service implementation.
    • Individual parsing functions within extractors (e.g., functions responsible for extracting video IDs, titles, thumbnails, etc.) - Specific data elements may become unavailable.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Rapid Updates: Monitor the NewPipe Extractor project and apply updates immediately when they are released. This is the primary mitigation for a direct NewPipe threat.
    • Robust Error Handling: Implement comprehensive error handling in the application to gracefully degrade functionality when extraction fails. Provide informative error messages to the user. (Application-level mitigation, but crucial).
    • Fallback Mechanisms: If possible, implement alternative methods for retrieving data (e.g., a different extractor, a cached version of the data). (Application-level, but helps mitigate the impact).
    • Automated Testing: Implement automated tests that regularly check the extractor's functionality against the target services. This can provide early warning of breaking changes. (Application-level, but helps detect NewPipe failures).
    • Caching: Implement a caching layer (with appropriate cache invalidation strategies) to reduce the frequency of requests to the target service and provide some resilience against temporary outages. (Application-level).

Threat: Data Integrity Manipulation (Subtle Changes)

2. Threat: Data Integrity Manipulation (Subtle Changes)

  • Description: The target service subtly alters the data it returns in a way that is not immediately obvious to the extractor. The attacker (service provider) might inject promotional content, subtly alter video metadata, or censor certain information. This is done to manipulate the user experience or promote specific content. NewPipe Extractor fails to detect these changes.
  • Impact: The application displays incorrect, misleading, or biased information to the user. This can damage the application's reputation and erode user trust.
  • NewPipe Component Affected:
    • Specific service extractors (e.g., YoutubeStreamExtractor, SoundcloudStreamExtractor).
    • Individual parsing functions within extractors responsible for specific data fields (e.g., title, description, view count).
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Data Validation (Difficult): Implement data validation checks within the application to verify the consistency and plausibility of the extracted data. This is challenging, as it requires understanding the expected data format and range of values. (Application-level, but helps detect NewPipe's failure to handle manipulated data).
    • Cross-Referencing (Impractical): If feasible (often not), compare the extracted data with other sources to identify discrepancies. (Application-level).
    • User Reporting: Provide a mechanism for users to report incorrect or suspicious data. (Application-level).
    • Monitoring: Monitor for patterns of data manipulation or anomalies. (Application-level).
    • Contribute to NewPipe: If you identify a pattern of manipulation that NewPipe is missing, consider contributing code or reporting the issue to the NewPipe Extractor project to improve its detection capabilities.

Threat: Extractor Vulnerability Exploitation (Code-Level Bugs)

3. Threat: Extractor Vulnerability Exploitation (Code-Level Bugs)

  • Description: A malicious actor discovers and exploits a vulnerability within the NewPipe Extractor code itself (e.g., a buffer overflow, an integer overflow, a parsing error). The attacker crafts malicious input (e.g., a specially crafted URL or response from a compromised server) that triggers the vulnerability. This is a direct vulnerability in NewPipe.
  • Impact: The vulnerability could lead to a crash of the application using the extractor, data corruption, or potentially even arbitrary code execution (although this is less likely in a well-designed integration).
  • NewPipe Component Affected:
    • Potentially any component of the extractor, depending on the specific vulnerability. This could include:
      • Downloader (if the vulnerability is in the network handling).
      • Specific service extractors.
      • Parsing functions within extractors.
      • Utility functions.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Keep Updated: Regularly update the NewPipe Extractor library to the latest version to receive security patches. This is the primary mitigation.
    • Input Validation (Application Level): Sanitize and validate any input before passing it to the extractor. This reduces the attack surface, even though the vulnerability is in NewPipe.
    • Fuzz Testing: Conduct fuzz testing of the application's integration with the extractor to identify potential vulnerabilities. (Can help discover NewPipe bugs).
    • Code Review: Perform regular code reviews of the application's integration with the extractor, focusing on security best practices. (Indirectly helps by ensuring safe usage of the library).
    • Memory Safety: If possible, use memory-safe languages or techniques when integrating the extractor. (Reduces the impact of potential NewPipe bugs).
    • Contribute to NewPipe: If a vulnerability is found, responsibly disclose it to the NewPipe Extractor developers or contribute a fix.