Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
55 lines (46 loc) · 6.52 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

55 lines (46 loc) · 6.52 KB

Threat Model Analysis for freecodecamp/freecodecamp

Threat: Insecure Code Execution Sandboxing

  • Description: An attacker exploits vulnerabilities in the code execution sandbox, escaping the restricted environment. They craft malicious code to gain unauthorized access to freeCodeCamp's servers, potentially reading sensitive data, executing arbitrary commands on the server, or launching a denial-of-service attack against the platform's infrastructure.
  • Impact: Critical - Full server compromise, potential data breach exposing user data and platform secrets, complete denial of service rendering freeCodeCamp unavailable, severe reputational damage.
  • Affected Component: Curriculum/Challenges (code execution environment), Backend Infrastructure (servers hosting the sandbox).
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Employ robust and mature sandboxing technologies like containerization (Docker, Kubernetes) or virtualization with strong security configurations.
    • Implement multiple layers of security and isolation for the code execution environment.
    • Regularly perform in-depth security audits and penetration testing specifically targeting sandbox escape vulnerabilities.
    • Maintain a rapid incident response plan to contain and mitigate any sandbox escape attempts.
    • Enforce strict resource limits and security policies within the sandbox environment.

Threat: Vulnerabilities in Code Evaluation/Testing Logic

  • Description: Attackers discover critical flaws in freeCodeCamp's challenge test suites or code evaluation logic. They create specially crafted solutions that, when evaluated, trigger unexpected behavior in the testing environment. This could be exploited to execute arbitrary code within the evaluation system, potentially leading to server-side vulnerabilities or manipulation of the platform's core functionalities.
  • Impact: High - Potential for remote code execution on evaluation servers, manipulation of challenge outcomes and user progress on a large scale, compromise of platform integrity, potential for escalating to broader infrastructure compromise.
  • Affected Component: Curriculum/Challenges (test suites, evaluation scripts), Backend API (handling submission evaluation).
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Implement extremely rigorous and security-focused testing and review processes for all challenge test suites and evaluation logic.
    • Employ static analysis and fuzzing techniques to identify potential vulnerabilities in evaluation code.
    • Isolate the evaluation environment as much as possible from the main platform infrastructure.
    • Sanitize and validate user-submitted code with extreme caution before execution in the evaluation environment.
    • Implement robust error handling and security logging within the evaluation system to detect and respond to suspicious activity.

Threat: Code Contribution Security Risks

  • Description: A malicious actor, posing as a contributor, submits a pull request containing intentionally malicious code. If code review processes are insufficient, this malicious code could be merged into the freeCodeCamp codebase. This could introduce critical vulnerabilities like backdoors, remote code execution flaws, or privilege escalation points, directly impacting the security of the live platform for all users.
  • Impact: High - Introduction of critical vulnerabilities into the core platform, potential for widespread exploitation affecting all users, data breaches, platform compromise, long-term reputational damage and loss of user trust.
  • Affected Component: Codebase (all parts of the application code), Development Workflow (pull request process), GitHub Repository.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Mandate multi-person, security-focused code reviews for all pull requests, especially from new or less-established contributors.
    • Implement automated Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tools within the CI/CD pipeline for every pull request.
    • Establish a trusted and vetted core team responsible for final code review and merging decisions.
    • Provide mandatory security training for all contributors, emphasizing secure coding practices and threat awareness.
    • Implement code signing and provenance tracking to ensure code integrity and identify the origin of all code contributions.

Threat: Misconfiguration of Cloud Infrastructure Specific to freeCodeCamp's Setup

  • Description: FreeCodeCamp's cloud infrastructure (e.g., AWS, GCP, Azure) is misconfigured due to human error or lack of secure defaults. This leads to critical security weaknesses such as publicly exposed storage buckets containing sensitive data (database backups, API keys), overly permissive network access allowing unauthorized external connections to internal systems, or insecurely configured serverless functions granting excessive privileges. Attackers exploit these misconfigurations to gain unauthorized access.
  • Impact: High - Data breaches exposing sensitive user data and platform secrets, unauthorized access to backend systems and databases, potential for complete platform takeover, denial of service through infrastructure manipulation, significant financial and reputational damage.
  • Affected Component: Cloud Infrastructure (AWS, GCP, Azure services), Deployment Configuration, Infrastructure as Code (IaC).
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Adopt Infrastructure as Code (IaC) practices to automate infrastructure provisioning and ensure consistent, auditable, and secure configurations.
    • Implement regular and automated security audits of cloud infrastructure configurations using Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) tools.
    • Enforce the principle of least privilege for all cloud IAM roles and security group rules.
    • Utilize cloud provider security best practices and hardening guides.
    • Implement robust monitoring and alerting for cloud infrastructure security events and configuration changes.
    • Conduct regular penetration testing of the cloud infrastructure to identify and remediate misconfigurations.