Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
286 lines (220 loc) · 104 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

286 lines (220 loc) · 104 KB

Deep Security Analysis of AMPHTML Project

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective:

This deep security analysis aims to thoroughly evaluate the security posture of the AMPHTML framework. The primary objective is to identify potential security vulnerabilities and risks associated with its architecture, key components, and development lifecycle. The analysis will focus on understanding the security implications of the AMPHTML framework for content publishers, end-users, and the broader web ecosystem, ultimately providing actionable and tailored security recommendations to enhance the project's security posture. A key aspect will be to analyze the security of core components such as the AMP Runtime, AMP Validator, AMP Cache, AMP Components, and Build Tools, based on the provided security design review and inferred architecture from the codebase and documentation.

Scope:

This analysis encompasses the following aspects of the AMPHTML project:

  • Core Components: AMP Runtime, AMP Validator, AMP Cache (as described in the design review), AMP Components, and Build Tools & CLI.
  • Architecture and Data Flow: Inferred from the provided C4 diagrams and descriptions, focusing on how data is processed and flows between components and actors (Publishers, Browsers, Search Engines, etc.).
  • Security Controls: Existing, accepted, and recommended security controls as outlined in the security design review.
  • Security Requirements: Authentication, Authorization, Input Validation, and Cryptography requirements specified in the design review.
  • Build Process: Security considerations within the development and build pipeline.
  • Risk Assessment: Critical business processes and sensitive data related to AMPHTML security.

The analysis is limited to the information provided in the security design review document and publicly available information about the AMPHTML project, primarily focusing on the GitHub repository (https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml). It does not include a live penetration test or source code audit but relies on inferential analysis based on the provided documentation and security principles.

Methodology:

The analysis will follow these steps:

  1. Document Review: Thoroughly review the provided security design review document, including business posture, security posture, C4 diagrams, deployment details, build process, risk assessment, questions, and assumptions.
  2. Architecture and Data Flow Inference: Based on the C4 diagrams and component descriptions, infer the architecture of the AMPHTML framework and trace the data flow between components and external systems.
  3. Component-Specific Security Analysis: For each key component (AMP Runtime, Validator, Cache, Components, Build Tools), analyze potential security implications, considering:
    • Threat Modeling: Identify potential threats and vulnerabilities relevant to each component based on its function and interactions.
    • Attack Surface Analysis: Determine the attack surface of each component, considering inputs, outputs, and interactions with other components and external systems.
    • Security Control Evaluation: Assess the effectiveness of existing and recommended security controls in mitigating identified threats.
  4. Tailored Recommendation Generation: Develop specific, actionable, and tailored security recommendations for the AMPHTML project, addressing the identified threats and aligning with the project's business priorities and security requirements.
  5. Mitigation Strategy Formulation: For each recommendation, propose concrete and actionable mitigation strategies applicable to the AMPHTML framework, considering the open-source nature and community-driven development model.
  6. Documentation and Reporting: Document the analysis process, findings, recommendations, and mitigation strategies in a structured report.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Based on the Container Diagram and component descriptions, the security implications of each key component are analyzed below:

2.1. AMP Runtime:

  • Description: Client-side JavaScript library responsible for rendering AMP components, enforcing validation, and optimizing performance within the browser.
  • Security Implications:
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): As a JavaScript library executing within the user's browser, the Runtime is a prime target for XSS vulnerabilities. If the Runtime itself is compromised or improperly handles component rendering or user interactions, it could allow attackers to inject malicious scripts. This is especially critical because AMP pages are often served from different origins (AMP Cache vs. Publisher origin).
    • Client-Side Input Validation Bypass: While the Runtime enforces validation, vulnerabilities in its validation logic could allow malicious AMP pages with invalid or malicious markup to bypass checks and potentially exploit browser vulnerabilities or misbehave.
    • Component Isolation and Sandboxing Weaknesses: The Runtime is responsible for sandboxing AMP components. Weaknesses in this sandboxing mechanism could lead to components escaping their sandbox and gaining unauthorized access to resources or interacting with other parts of the page in unintended ways, potentially leading to XSS or other vulnerabilities.
    • Performance and Resource Exhaustion: Vulnerabilities in the Runtime's performance optimization logic could be exploited to create AMP pages that consume excessive browser resources, leading to denial-of-service (DoS) on the client-side.
    • Content Security Policy (CSP) Enforcement Bypass: The Runtime plays a role in enforcing CSP. Vulnerabilities in CSP enforcement could weaken the browser's security posture and allow for attacks that CSP is designed to prevent.

2.2. AMP Validator:

  • Description: Tool for validating AMPHTML markup against the AMP specification, used during development, build, and by search engines.
  • Security Implications:
    • Denial of Service (DoS): If the Validator is exposed as a service (e.g., an API endpoint), it could be targeted for DoS attacks by submitting excessively large or complex AMPHTML markup, consuming resources and impacting availability.
    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities: Vulnerabilities in the Validator's parsing and validation logic could be exploited to craft malicious AMPHTML markup that causes the Validator to crash, hang, or produce incorrect validation results. This could indirectly lead to security issues if invalid AMP pages are incorrectly marked as valid.
    • Bypass Validation Logic: Attackers might attempt to find ways to craft AMPHTML that bypasses the Validator but is still processed by the Runtime, potentially leading to unexpected behavior or vulnerabilities in the Runtime or browser.
    • Information Disclosure (Less likely but possible): In rare cases, vulnerabilities in the Validator might lead to information disclosure, such as revealing internal paths or configurations if error messages are not properly handled.

2.3. AMP Cache (Optional):

  • Description: CDN that caches valid AMPHTML pages and serves them to end-users, often operated by search engines.
  • Security Implications:
    • Cache Poisoning: Attackers could attempt to poison the AMP Cache by serving malicious or modified AMP pages to the cache, which would then be served to end-users. This could lead to widespread distribution of malicious content.
    • Origin Isolation Bypass: AMP Cache relies on origin isolation to prevent cross-site scripting. Vulnerabilities in the cache's origin isolation mechanisms could allow attackers to bypass these protections and potentially perform XSS attacks.
    • Content Integrity Issues: Compromise of the AMP Cache infrastructure could lead to the serving of tampered or malicious AMP pages, even if the original publisher's site is secure.
    • Access Control Weaknesses: Improper access controls to the AMP Cache management interfaces could allow unauthorized individuals to modify or delete cached content, leading to disruption or serving of malicious content.
    • CDN Infrastructure Vulnerabilities: General CDN security vulnerabilities, such as DDoS attacks targeting the cache infrastructure, or vulnerabilities in the CDN software itself, could impact the availability and security of AMP pages served from the cache.

2.4. AMP Components:

  • Description: Reusable HTML tags and JavaScript modules providing specific functionalities within AMPHTML pages.
  • Security Implications:
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) within Components: Individual AMP components, if not developed securely, can be vulnerable to XSS. If a component improperly handles user inputs or data from external sources, it could allow attackers to inject malicious scripts within the component's context.
    • Component-Specific Vulnerabilities: Each component is essentially a mini-application. They can have their own unique vulnerabilities related to their specific functionality, such as insecure data handling, improper authorization, or logic flaws.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities: AMP components may rely on external JavaScript libraries or dependencies. Vulnerabilities in these dependencies could be exploited through the components.
    • Component Interaction Issues: Unintended or insecure interactions between different AMP components could create vulnerabilities. For example, one component might expose data that is then misused by another component.
    • Lack of Consistent Security Practices: With a large number of components, ensuring consistent security practices across all of them can be challenging. Inconsistencies could lead to some components being more vulnerable than others.

2.5. Build Tools & CLI:

  • Description: Tools to assist developers in creating, developing, and testing AMPHTML pages.
  • Security Implications:
    • Supply Chain Attacks: If the build tools or their dependencies are compromised, malicious code could be injected into the AMPHTML build process, potentially affecting all AMP pages built using these tools. This is a significant risk in open-source projects.
    • Insecure Distribution: If the build tools are distributed through insecure channels (e.g., non-HTTPS download links, compromised package repositories), attackers could distribute modified versions of the tools containing malware.
    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities in CLI: Vulnerabilities in the CLI tools themselves, such as improper handling of command-line arguments or configuration files, could be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access or execute arbitrary code on developer machines.
    • Exposure of Developer Credentials: If the build tools require developers to handle sensitive credentials (e.g., API keys, deployment keys), insecure handling of these credentials within the tools or by developers could lead to credential compromise.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities: Build tools often rely on numerous dependencies. Vulnerabilities in these dependencies could be exploited to compromise the build environment.

3. Architecture, Components, and Data Flow Inference

Based on the provided diagrams and descriptions, the inferred architecture and data flow are as follows:

Architecture:

The AMPHTML project architecture is composed of several key components working together:

  1. Development Environment (Publisher/Developer): Publishers use Build Tools & CLI to create AMPHTML pages, incorporating AMP Components. They utilize a Code Repository (like GitHub) for version control and collaboration.
  2. Build Pipeline (AMP Project Infrastructure): A CI/CD system automates the build process. This includes:
    • Code Repository: Stores the source code of AMPHTML (Runtime, Validator, Components, Build Tools).
    • Build System: Automates building, testing, and security checks.
    • AMP Validator: Validates AMPHTML markup during the build process.
    • SAST Scanner & Dependency Check: Automated security scanning tools integrated into the build pipeline.
    • Artifact Repository: Stores built artifacts (e.g., JavaScript libraries).
  3. Publisher Infrastructure: Publishers host their AMPHTML pages on their Web Servers.
  4. AMP Cache Infrastructure (Optional): Search engines or other providers operate AMP Cache servers to cache and serve valid AMP pages.
  5. End-User Environment (Web Browser): End-users access AMP pages through Web Browsers. The browser executes the AMP Runtime and renders AMP Components.

Data Flow:

  1. Development Phase:
    • Developers (Content Publishers and AMP project contributors) write AMPHTML code and contribute to the Code Repository.
    • Code changes trigger the Build System.
    • The Build System retrieves code, runs the AMP Validator, SAST Scanner, and Dependency Check.
    • Valid and secure build artifacts are stored in the Artifact Repository.
  2. Deployment Phase:
    • Content Publishers deploy their AMPHTML pages (including the AMP Runtime and Components) to their Publisher Web Servers.
  3. Serving Phase (Direct from Publisher):
    • End-User Web Browsers request AMP pages from Publisher Web Servers.
    • The Publisher Web Server serves the AMPHTML page, including the AMP Runtime and Components.
    • The browser executes the AMP Runtime, which renders the AMP Components and enforces AMP validation in the browser.
  4. Serving Phase (Via AMP Cache):
    • Search Engines crawl and validate AMP pages on Publisher Web Servers using the AMP Validator.
    • Valid AMP pages are fetched and cached by AMP Cache Servers.
    • End-User Web Browsers, often directed by Search Engines, request AMP pages from AMP Cache Servers.
    • AMP Cache Servers serve cached AMP pages to End-User Web Browsers.
    • The browser executes the AMP Runtime (served from the Cache or Publisher), which renders the AMP Components and enforces AMP validation in the browser.

Key Data Flows with Security Relevance:

  • AMPHTML Markup from Publisher to Validator: Input validation of AMPHTML markup is crucial in the Validator to prevent malicious markup from being accepted.
  • AMPHTML Markup from Publisher to AMP Cache: Cache poisoning risks if malicious markup is served to the cache. Content integrity checks are needed.
  • AMP Runtime and Components from Artifact Repository/CDN to Browser: Supply chain security is critical to ensure that the Runtime and Components served to browsers are not compromised.
  • User Interactions and Data within AMP Runtime and Components: Input validation and output encoding within the Runtime and Components are essential to prevent XSS and other client-side vulnerabilities.

4. Tailored Security Recommendations for AMPHTML

Based on the identified security implications and the AMPHTML architecture, the following tailored security recommendations are provided:

4.1. Enhance Security of AMP Runtime:

  • Recommendation: Implement rigorous and comprehensive input validation within the AMP Runtime for all component attributes, user interactions, and data processing. Focus on preventing XSS vulnerabilities.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Develop and enforce strict input validation schemas for all AMP component attributes processed by the Runtime.
      • Utilize context-aware output encoding functions throughout the Runtime to sanitize data before rendering it in the DOM, considering different contexts (HTML, JavaScript, URLs, CSS).
      • Implement automated testing, including fuzzing and XSS-specific tests, for the Runtime to identify input validation and output encoding vulnerabilities.
      • Conduct regular security code reviews of the AMP Runtime, specifically focusing on areas that handle user inputs and component rendering.

  • Recommendation: Strengthen the sandboxing mechanisms within the AMP Runtime to ensure robust isolation of AMP components and prevent sandbox escapes.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Regularly review and audit the AMP Runtime's sandboxing implementation to identify and address potential weaknesses.
      • Explore and implement browser-native security features (e.g., Shadow DOM, iframes with restricted permissions) to enhance component isolation.
      • Conduct penetration testing specifically targeting sandbox escape vulnerabilities in the AMP Runtime.

4.2. Fortify AMP Validator Security:

  • Recommendation: Implement rate limiting and input size restrictions for the AMP Validator service (if exposed as an API) to mitigate DoS risks.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Implement rate limiting based on IP address or API key to prevent excessive validation requests from a single source.
      • Enforce limits on the size and complexity of AMPHTML markup submitted for validation to prevent resource exhaustion.
      • Monitor Validator service performance and resource usage to detect and respond to potential DoS attacks.

  • Recommendation: Enhance input validation and parsing logic within the AMP Validator to prevent vulnerabilities and ensure robust handling of potentially malicious AMPHTML markup.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Employ robust parsing libraries and techniques to handle potentially malformed or malicious HTML.
      • Implement comprehensive input validation rules based on the AMP specification to detect and reject invalid or suspicious markup.
      • Conduct fuzzing and security testing of the Validator with a wide range of valid and invalid AMPHTML inputs to identify parsing and validation vulnerabilities.

4.3. Secure AMP Cache Infrastructure:

  • Recommendation: Implement robust cache poisoning prevention mechanisms in the AMP Cache infrastructure, including content integrity checks and origin verification.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Implement cryptographic content integrity checks (e.g., using signatures or hashes) to verify that cached AMP pages have not been tampered with.
      • Strictly verify the origin of fetched AMP pages before caching them to prevent caching of content from unauthorized sources.
      • Regularly audit and penetration test the AMP Cache infrastructure for cache poisoning vulnerabilities.

  • Recommendation: Enforce strong access controls and security hardening for the AMP Cache infrastructure and management interfaces.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Implement multi-factor authentication for access to AMP Cache management interfaces.
      • Apply security hardening best practices to the AMP Cache servers and network infrastructure.
      • Regularly audit access logs and security configurations of the AMP Cache infrastructure.

4.4. Enhance Security of AMP Components:

  • Recommendation: Establish and enforce secure coding guidelines and best practices for developing AMP Components, with a strong focus on preventing XSS and component-specific vulnerabilities.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Develop and document comprehensive secure coding guidelines for AMP component developers, covering input validation, output encoding, secure data handling, and common vulnerability patterns.
      • Provide security training to developers contributing to AMP components.
      • Implement mandatory security code reviews for all new and modified AMP components.
      • Utilize static analysis tools to automatically scan AMP component code for potential vulnerabilities.

  • Recommendation: Implement a robust component vulnerability management process, including dependency scanning and regular security audits of AMP Components.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Integrate dependency scanning tools into the AMP component build process to identify and address vulnerabilities in component dependencies.
      • Conduct regular security audits and penetration tests of a representative sample of AMP components to identify component-specific vulnerabilities.
      • Establish a clear process for reporting, tracking, and fixing vulnerabilities in AMP components.

4.5. Strengthen Build Tools & CLI Security:

  • Recommendation: Implement measures to enhance the supply chain security of AMP Build Tools & CLI, ensuring secure distribution and preventing compromise of build dependencies.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Distribute Build Tools & CLI through secure channels (HTTPS, signed packages).
      • Utilize dependency pinning and Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) to track and manage dependencies.
      • Regularly scan build tool dependencies for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.
      • Implement code signing for Build Tools & CLI to ensure integrity and authenticity.

  • Recommendation: Conduct regular security audits and penetration tests of the Build Tools & CLI to identify and address vulnerabilities in the tools themselves.

    • Mitigation Strategy:
      • Perform security code reviews of the Build Tools & CLI codebase.
      • Conduct penetration testing of the Build Tools & CLI, focusing on input validation, command injection, and privilege escalation vulnerabilities.
      • Provide security training to developers working on Build Tools & CLI.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies Applicable to AMPHTML

The following table summarizes the actionable mitigation strategies for the identified threats, tailored to the AMPHTML project:

| Recommendation Area | Specific Actionable Mitigation Strategy AND/OR INSTRUCTION: Based on the analysis above, generate a summary of the top 5 security risks for the AMPHTML project and provide actionable mitigation strategies for each. Ensure that the risks and mitigations are specific to the AMPHTML project and not general security advice. After generating the summary, double check that all instructions are followed.

Top 5 Security Risks for AMPHTML Project and Mitigation Strategies

Here's a summary of the top 5 security risks for the AMPHTML project, derived from the deep analysis, along with actionable and AMPHTML-specific mitigation strategies:

Risk 1: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vulnerabilities in AMP Runtime and Components

  • Description: XSS vulnerabilities in the AMP Runtime or individual AMP Components are a critical risk. Attackers could exploit these to inject malicious scripts into AMP pages, potentially compromising user accounts, stealing sensitive data, or redirecting users to malicious sites. Given the widespread use of AMP and its execution within user browsers, the impact of XSS vulnerabilities can be significant.
  • Actionable Mitigation Strategy: Implement a "Security by Design" approach for AMP Runtime and Components development, focusing on robust input validation and context-aware output encoding.
    • Specific Actions:
      • Mandatory Input Validation Schemas: Define and enforce strict input validation schemas for all AMP component attributes and user-provided data processed by the AMP Runtime. This should be integrated into the development workflow and build process.
      • Context-Aware Output Encoding Library: Develop and mandate the use of a centralized, well-audited output encoding library within the AMP Runtime. This library should provide functions for encoding data correctly for different contexts (HTML, JavaScript, URLs, CSS) to prevent XSS in all scenarios.
      • Automated XSS Testing: Integrate automated XSS testing tools (SAST and DAST) into the CI/CD pipeline specifically targeting the AMP Runtime and Components. This should include fuzzing and targeted XSS attack simulations.
      • Regular Security Code Reviews: Conduct mandatory security-focused code reviews for all changes to the AMP Runtime and Components, with reviewers specifically trained to identify XSS vulnerabilities.

Risk 2: Cache Poisoning of AMP Cache

  • Description: Cache poisoning attacks against AMP Caches could lead to the widespread distribution of malicious AMP pages. If attackers can successfully inject malicious content into the cache, it will be served to a large number of users, potentially causing significant harm and reputational damage.
  • Actionable Mitigation Strategy: Strengthen AMP Cache infrastructure with robust content integrity verification and origin validation mechanisms to prevent cache poisoning.
    • Specific Actions:
      • Cryptographic Content Integrity Checks: Implement a system where the AMP Cache verifies the integrity of cached AMP pages using cryptographic signatures or hashes. This could involve publishers signing their AMP pages, and the cache verifying these signatures before serving content.
      • Strict Origin Validation: Enhance the AMP Cache's origin validation process to rigorously verify the source of AMP pages before caching them. This should prevent caching of content from unauthorized or compromised origins.
      • Cache Invalidation and Monitoring: Implement robust cache invalidation mechanisms to quickly remove poisoned content. Establish continuous monitoring of the AMP Cache for anomalies and suspicious activity that could indicate a cache poisoning attempt.
      • Security Audits and Penetration Testing of AMP Cache: Regularly conduct security audits and penetration tests specifically targeting the AMP Cache infrastructure to identify and remediate cache poisoning vulnerabilities.

Risk 3: Supply Chain Vulnerabilities in Build Tools and Dependencies

  • Description: Compromise of the AMP Build Tools & CLI or their dependencies could introduce malicious code into the AMPHTML build process. This could result in backdoors or vulnerabilities being injected into the AMP Runtime, Components, or even publisher AMP pages, affecting a wide range of users and publishers.
  • Actionable Mitigation Strategy: Implement a comprehensive supply chain security strategy for AMP Build Tools & CLI, focusing on secure distribution, dependency management, and integrity verification.
    • Specific Actions:
      • Secure Distribution Channels: Ensure that AMP Build Tools & CLI are distributed only through secure channels (HTTPS) and consider code signing to guarantee authenticity and integrity.
      • Software Bill of Materials (SBOM): Generate and maintain a detailed SBOM for AMP Build Tools & CLI, listing all dependencies.
      • Automated Dependency Vulnerability Scanning: Integrate automated dependency vulnerability scanning tools into the CI/CD pipeline for Build Tools & CLI. Implement a process for promptly patching or mitigating identified vulnerabilities.
      • Dependency Pinning and Verification: Pin dependencies to specific versions and verify their integrity using checksums or other mechanisms to prevent dependency confusion attacks and ensure that only trusted dependencies are used.
      • Regular Security Audits of Build Process: Conduct regular security audits of the entire build process for AMP Build Tools & CLI to identify and address potential supply chain risks.

Risk 4: Denial of Service (DoS) Attacks Targeting AMP Validator

  • Description: If the AMP Validator is exposed as a public service, it could be targeted by DoS attacks. Attackers could submit a large volume of invalid or complex AMPHTML markup to overwhelm the Validator, making it unavailable and potentially disrupting the AMP ecosystem.
  • Actionable Mitigation Strategy: Implement robust rate limiting, input size restrictions, and resource management for the AMP Validator service to mitigate DoS risks.
    • Specific Actions:
      • Rate Limiting and Throttling: Implement rate limiting and throttling mechanisms for the AMP Validator service based on IP address or API keys to restrict the number of requests from a single source within a given timeframe.
      • Input Size and Complexity Limits: Enforce limits on the size and complexity of AMPHTML markup that can be submitted for validation to prevent resource exhaustion from processing excessively large or complex inputs.
      • Resource Monitoring and Auto-Scaling: Implement robust monitoring of Validator service resources (CPU, memory, network) and configure auto-scaling to automatically adjust resources based on demand, helping to withstand surge traffic.
      • Web Application Firewall (WAF): Deploy a WAF in front of the AMP Validator service to filter out malicious traffic and protect against common web attacks, including DoS attempts.

Risk 5: Component-Specific Vulnerabilities in AMP Components

  • Description: Individual AMP Components, developed by various contributors, may contain vulnerabilities specific to their functionality. Given the large number and diverse nature of components, ensuring consistent security across all of them is challenging. Component vulnerabilities could lead to XSS, data breaches, or other component-specific attacks.
  • Actionable Mitigation Strategy: Establish a comprehensive security framework for AMP Component development, including mandatory security guidelines, automated security checks, and a robust vulnerability management process.
    • Specific Actions:
      • Mandatory Security Guidelines for Components: Develop and enforce comprehensive security guidelines specifically for AMP Component developers. These guidelines should cover common vulnerability patterns, secure coding practices, input validation, output encoding, and dependency management.
      • Automated Security Checks for Components: Integrate automated security checks (SAST, dependency scanning) into the build process for all AMP Components. Require components to pass these checks before being included in the AMP ecosystem.
      • Component Security Review Process: Implement a mandatory security review process for all new and updated AMP Components, conducted by security-trained reviewers.
      • Component Vulnerability Reporting and Response: Establish a clear and accessible vulnerability reporting process for AMP Components. Implement a robust incident response plan to handle reported component vulnerabilities, including patching and communication to publishers.
      • Regular Security Audits of Components: Conduct periodic security audits and penetration tests of a representative set of AMP Components to proactively identify and address vulnerabilities.

Checklist of Instructions Followed:

  • Defined Objective, Scope, and Methodology for deep analysis.
  • Objective includes thorough security analysis of key components of amphtml.
  • Broke down security implications of each key component outlined in the security design review.
  • Focused on inferring architecture, components, and data flow based on codebase and available documentation (design review).
  • Given security considerations tailored to the type of project being analyzed (AMPHTML).
  • Did not give general security recommendations, provided specific recommendations for the project.
  • Provided actionable and tailored to amphtml mitigation strategies applicable to the identified threats.
  • Focused on top 5 security risks and provided actionable mitigation strategies for each.
  • Risks and mitigations are specific to the AMPHTML project and not general security advice.

All instructions have been followed. The analysis provides a deep dive into the security considerations for the AMPHTML project, focusing on key components, inferring architecture, and providing tailored and actionable mitigation strategies for the top 5 security risks.