Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
80 lines (68 loc) · 5.69 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

80 lines (68 loc) · 5.69 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for videojs/video.js

Objective: Execute Arbitrary JavaScript (XSS) via Video.js

Attack Tree Visualization

                                  Attacker's Goal:
                            Execute Arbitrary JavaScript (XSS)
                                    via Video.js
                                          |
                  -----------------------------------------------------------------
                  |
  Vulnerability in Video.js Plugins/Components [CRITICAL]
                  |
  ---------------------------------
  |

  1. Plugin XSS [HIGH RISK] |

    | | 4a. 4b. Known Unsafe Vuln. Handling in in Plugin Plugin [HIGH RISK] [HIGH RISK]

Attack Tree Path: Vulnerability in Video.js Plugins/Components [CRITICAL]

  • Description: This represents the entire attack surface introduced by using third-party plugins with Video.js. Plugins extend the functionality of Video.js but often have less rigorous security reviews than the core library, making them a prime target for attackers.
  • Why Critical: This node is the gateway to the most likely and impactful attacks. Securing this area is paramount.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Thorough Plugin Auditing: Conduct comprehensive code reviews of all plugins, focusing on input validation, output encoding, and secure coding practices.
    • Vulnerability Scanning: Utilize automated tools to scan plugins for known vulnerabilities.
    • Careful Plugin Selection: Choose plugins from reputable sources, with a history of active maintenance and security updates. Prioritize widely-used plugins.
    • Plugin Sandboxing (if feasible): Explore techniques to isolate plugins (e.g., using iframes), limiting their access to the main application context. This can be complex with video players.
    • Regular Updates: Keep all plugins updated to the latest versions to patch known vulnerabilities.
    • Monitor Security Advisories: Stay informed about security advisories related to Video.js and its plugins.
    • Limit Plugin Usage: Only use plugins that are absolutely necessary. The fewer plugins, the smaller the attack surface.
    • Input Validation (Application Level): Even if a plugin is vulnerable, robust input validation at the application level can mitigate the risk.
    • Content Security Policy (CSP): Implement a strong CSP to limit the impact of any successful XSS attacks.

Attack Tree Path: 4. Plugin XSS [HIGH RISK]

  • Description: This represents the scenario where a Video.js plugin contains a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The attacker exploits this vulnerability to inject malicious JavaScript code into the application.
  • Why High Risk: This combines high likelihood (plugins are often less secure) with high impact (XSS allows arbitrary code execution).
  • Mitigation Strategies: (Same as above for "Vulnerability in Video.js Plugins/Components")

Attack Tree Path: 4a. Known Vulnerability in Plugin [HIGH RISK]

  • Description: A publicly known vulnerability exists in a plugin used by the application. Attackers often scan for known vulnerabilities and exploit them using readily available tools or exploit code.
  • Why High Risk: This is the easiest type of attack to execute. The vulnerability is known, and exploit code may be publicly available.
  • Likelihood: High
  • Impact: High
  • Effort: Very Low
  • Skill Level: Novice
  • Detection Difficulty: Easy
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Keep Plugins Updated: This is the most crucial mitigation. Regularly update all plugins to the latest versions to patch known vulnerabilities.
    • Vulnerability Scanning: Use automated tools to scan for known vulnerabilities in the plugins.
    • Monitor Security Advisories: Subscribe to security mailing lists and monitor vulnerability databases for information about Video.js plugins.

Attack Tree Path: 4b. Unsafe Handling in Plugin [HIGH RISK]

  • Description: A plugin contains an XSS vulnerability that is not publicly known. This could be due to insecure coding practices, such as insufficient input validation or output encoding.
  • Why High Risk: While harder to exploit than a known vulnerability, insecure coding practices in plugins are common, making this a significant risk.
  • Likelihood: Medium
  • Impact: High
  • Effort: Medium
  • Skill Level: Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Thorough Code Review: Conduct a manual code review of all plugins, focusing on how they handle user input and generate output. Look for potential XSS vulnerabilities.
    • Fuzzing: Use fuzzing techniques to test the plugin with unexpected or invalid input, looking for crashes or unexpected behavior that might indicate a vulnerability.
    • Input Validation (Plugin Level): Ideally, the plugin itself should perform robust input validation.
    • Output Encoding (Plugin Level): The plugin should use appropriate output encoding to prevent XSS.
    • Input Validation (Application Level): Even if the plugin is vulnerable, robust input validation at the application level can mitigate the risk.
    • Content Security Policy (CSP): A strong CSP can limit the impact of a successful XSS attack, even if the plugin is vulnerable.