attack-surface.md

Attack Surface Analysis for eggjs/egg

Attack Surface: Configuration Mismanagement

• Description: Insecure or incorrect configuration of Egg.js application settings within config/config.*.js, config/plugin.js, and config/middleware.js files. This includes exposing sensitive information, disabling security features, or enabling insecure defaults through configuration.
• Egg.js Contribution: Egg.js's architecture heavily relies on configuration files to define application behavior, security middleware, plugin loading, and environment-specific settings. Misconfiguration in these Egg.js specific files directly leads to vulnerabilities.
• Example: Disabling CSRF protection by incorrectly setting security.csrf.enable = false in config/config.prod.js, or exposing database credentials in config.default.js that is inadvertently committed to a public repository.
• Impact: CSRF attacks, exposure of sensitive data (credentials, API keys), unauthorized access, and potential application compromise depending on the nature of the misconfiguration.
• Risk Severity: High to Critical
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Environment-Specific Configuration: Strictly separate development and production configurations using config.prod.js, config.local.js, etc.
  • Secure Defaults Review: Thoroughly review and override default configurations, ensuring they are secure for the intended environment, especially production.
  • Secret Management: Utilize environment variables or dedicated secret management solutions (like HashiCorp Vault, AWS Secrets Manager) to manage sensitive configuration values instead of hardcoding them in configuration files.
  • Configuration Audits: Regularly audit configuration files for security best practices and potential misconfigurations, particularly before deployments.

Attack Surface: Vulnerable or Malicious Plugins

• Description: Introduction of security vulnerabilities or malicious code through the use of compromised, outdated, or intentionally malicious Egg.js plugins.
• Egg.js Contribution: Egg.js's plugin system is a core architectural component for extending functionality. The framework's plugin loading mechanism can be exploited if plugin sources are not properly vetted, leading to the inclusion of vulnerable or malicious code within the application.
• Example: Installing an outdated Egg.js plugin with known security vulnerabilities from npm, or using a plugin from an untrusted source that contains a backdoor designed to exfiltrate application data.
• Impact: Full application compromise, data breaches, denial of service, remote code execution, or other malicious activities depending on the plugin's vulnerability or malicious intent.
• Risk Severity: Critical
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Plugin Source Vetting: Carefully vet plugins before installation. Evaluate plugin maintainers, community reputation, and security audit history if available. Prioritize plugins from trusted and reputable sources.
  • Dependency Scanning: Implement dependency scanning tools (like npm audit, Snyk, or OWASP Dependency-Check) to automatically identify known vulnerabilities in plugins and their transitive dependencies.
  • Principle of Least Privilege (Plugins): Install only necessary plugins and avoid plugins with excessive permissions or functionalities that are not strictly required.
  • Regular Plugin Updates: Maintain plugins up-to-date by regularly updating them to the latest versions to patch known vulnerabilities.
  • Secure Plugin Repositories: Download plugins only from trusted package registries like npmjs.com.

Attack Surface: Insecure Custom Middleware

• Description: Security vulnerabilities introduced by poorly developed or insecure custom middleware within the Egg.js application.
• Egg.js Contribution: Egg.js's middleware architecture is a fundamental pattern for request processing. Custom middleware, being a core part of application logic within the Egg.js framework, can introduce significant vulnerabilities if not developed with security in mind.
• Example: Custom authentication middleware with logic flaws that allow authentication bypass, or middleware vulnerable to injection attacks due to improper input sanitization within the Egg.js request handling pipeline.
• Impact: Authentication bypass, authorization flaws, injection vulnerabilities (SQL, XSS, Command Injection), data breaches, and other application-specific vulnerabilities arising from insecure request processing.
• Risk Severity: High to Critical
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Secure Coding Practices for Middleware: Adhere to secure coding practices when developing custom middleware, including robust input validation, proper output encoding, secure session management, and comprehensive error handling.
  • Security Code Reviews: Conduct thorough security code reviews and audits of custom middleware to proactively identify potential vulnerabilities before deployment.
  • Security Testing: Implement rigorous security testing, including penetration testing and vulnerability scanning, specifically targeting custom middleware components.
  • Leverage Security Libraries: Utilize well-established and security-audited libraries and modules for common middleware functionalities (like authentication, authorization, input validation) instead of writing custom security-sensitive code from scratch where feasible.

Attack Surface: Middleware Misordering or Misconfiguration

• Description: Incorrect ordering or insecure configuration of middleware within the Egg.js middleware pipeline, leading to security middleware being bypassed or rendered ineffective.
• Egg.js Contribution: The Egg.js middleware pipeline's sequential execution is crucial for security. Misordering or misconfiguration within the middleware.js file directly impacts the effectiveness of security measures implemented as middleware.
• Example: Placing a custom authorization middleware after a route handler that requires authorization, effectively bypassing authorization checks for that specific route within the Egg.js request lifecycle. Or misconfiguring CORS middleware to permit unintended cross-origin requests, weakening CORS protection.
• Impact: Bypassing intended security controls (authentication, authorization, CSRF protection, CORS), leading to unauthorized access, CSRF vulnerabilities, CORS vulnerabilities, and other security issues due to ineffective middleware protection.
• Risk Severity: High
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Middleware Pipeline Review: Carefully review the order of middleware definitions in middleware.js to ensure security-related middleware (authentication, authorization, security headers, CSRF protection, CORS) are correctly positioned and executed before application logic.
  • Configuration Validation: Validate middleware configurations to confirm they are set up as intended and are providing the expected security protections.
  • Middleware Pipeline Testing: Thoroughly test the entire middleware pipeline to verify that security middleware is functioning as designed and effectively protecting the application as intended within the Egg.js request flow.
  • Adherence to Best Practices: Strictly follow Egg.js documentation and established security best practices for middleware configuration and ordering to minimize misconfiguration risks.

Attack Surface: Session and Cookie Mismanagement

• Description: Insecure configuration or improper handling of sessions and cookies within Egg.js applications, leading to session hijacking, session fixation, or other cookie-related vulnerabilities.
• Egg.js Contribution: Egg.js provides built-in session management through the egg-session plugin and relies on cookies for session handling. Misconfiguration of Egg.js session features or insecure cookie practices directly expose session-related vulnerabilities.
• Example: Using a weak or default session secret in config/config.default.js, storing sessions insecurely (e.g., in memory in a distributed environment without proper session sharing mechanisms), or failing to set critical secure cookie attributes (HttpOnly, Secure, SameSite) for session cookies within the Egg.js context.
• Impact: Session hijacking, session fixation attacks, unauthorized access to user accounts, account takeover, CSRF vulnerabilities, and other session-related attacks that compromise user security and application integrity.
• Risk Severity: High
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Strong Session Secret: Generate and utilize a strong, cryptographically random session secret and store it securely (e.g., using environment variables or a dedicated secret management tool). Avoid default or easily guessable secrets.
  • Secure Session Storage: Select a secure and appropriate session storage mechanism based on application requirements and environment (e.g., Redis, database, secure cookie store with encryption). Avoid insecure in-memory storage in production, especially in distributed environments.
  • Secure Cookie Attributes: Always set the HttpOnly, Secure, and SameSite attributes for session cookies and other security-sensitive cookies to mitigate XSS, CSRF, and other cookie-based attacks.
  • Session Timeout and Inactivity Management: Implement appropriate session timeout and inactivity mechanisms to limit the lifespan of sessions and reduce the window of opportunity for session-based attacks.
  • Session Regeneration: Regenerate session IDs after successful user authentication and other critical actions to prevent session fixation attacks and enhance session security.

Attack Surface: Development Features Enabled in Production

• Description: Accidental or unintentional deployment of Egg.js applications with development mode, debugging features, or development-specific configurations still enabled in production environments.
• Egg.js Contribution: Egg.js distinguishes between development and production environments, but relies on developers to properly configure NODE_ENV and disable development-specific features for production deployments. Failure to do so exposes unnecessary attack surface.
• Example: Deploying an application with NODE_ENV=development in production, inadvertently enabling verbose logging, debugging endpoints, or performance monitoring tools that are not intended for public access and could reveal sensitive information or create exploitable pathways.
• Impact: Information disclosure (verbose logs, debugging data), exposure of debugging endpoints potentially leading to remote code execution or information leakage, performance degradation due to development overhead, and other security risks associated with exposing development functionalities in a production setting.
• Risk Severity: High
• Mitigation Strategies:
  • Environment Configuration Enforcement: Strictly enforce NODE_ENV=production in all production deployments. Automate environment configuration to prevent accidental misconfigurations.
  • Disable Debugging and Development Features: Ensure all debugging features, development middleware, and development-specific configurations are explicitly disabled or removed in production builds and deployments.
  • Production Build Process: Implement a robust production build process that optimizes the application for performance and security, automatically removing development-specific code, configurations, and dependencies.
  • Regular Security Audits: Conduct regular security audits of production deployments to identify and remediate any accidentally enabled development features or misconfigurations that could introduce security vulnerabilities.