Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
26 lines (21 loc) · 3.92 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

26 lines (21 loc) · 3.92 KB

Threat Model Analysis for videojs/video.js

Threat: Malicious Video Source URL Leading to Code Execution (via Vulnerable Tech)

  • Description: An attacker manipulates the video source URL provided to videojs.src() (or similar methods) to point to a malicious resource. This resource exploits a vulnerability in a Video.js "tech" (playback engine). Crucially, even if a tech like Flash is deprecated, if Video.js includes it as a fallback and the application doesn't explicitly disable it, this remains a direct Video.js threat. The attacker controls the URL, and Video.js's tech selection logic is the vulnerable component.
    • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the client's browser, potentially leading to complete system compromise.
    • Video.js Component Affected: videojs.getTech() (tech selection logic), the specific vulnerable tech implementation (e.g., the Flash tech if present and not explicitly disabled), videojs.src() (if it lacks sufficient server-side validation).
    • Risk Severity: Critical (if a vulnerable tech like Flash is enabled and exploitable); High (if a less severe vulnerability in another tech is exploited, but still directly within Video.js's control).
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Strict Source Whitelisting: Implement a server-side whitelist of allowed video source domains and URL patterns. Reject any URL not matching the whitelist.
      • Disable Unnecessary Techs: Explicitly disable fallback techs like Flash using the techOrder option: techOrder: ['html5']. This is crucial; simply not using Flash isn't enough if Video.js still includes it.
      • Server-Side Input Validation: Validate the video source URL on the server before passing it to Video.js. Do not rely on client-side validation.
      • Content Security Policy (CSP): Use a CSP with a restrictive media-src directive. Example: media-src 'self' https://trusted-cdn.com;
      • Regular Updates: Keep Video.js itself (and any directly included tech libraries) up-to-date.

Threat: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) via Vulnerable Core Video.js Functionality (Less Likely, but Possible)

  • Description: While less common than plugin-based XSS, a vulnerability could exist within core Video.js functions that handle user-provided data (e.g., options, captions, or text tracks). If Video.js itself insecurely handles this data and injects it into the DOM without proper sanitization, an attacker could exploit this. This is distinct from a plugin vulnerability; this is a flaw within Video.js's core code.
    • Impact: Execution of arbitrary JavaScript code in the context of the user's browser session, leading to session hijacking, data theft, etc.
    • Video.js Component Affected: Potentially any core function that handles user-provided data and interacts with the DOM (e.g., functions related to text track rendering, control bar customization, or error message display). This would require a specific, undiscovered vulnerability in Video.js itself.
    • Risk Severity: High
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Regular Updates: Keep Video.js up-to-date. This is the primary defense against vulnerabilities in the core library.
      • Input Validation (If Applicable): If your application allows users to provide any data that is directly used by Video.js (e.g., custom text track URLs), validate and sanitize this data on the server-side.
      • Review Video.js Source (If Necessary): If you have a very high-security requirement and suspect a potential vulnerability in a specific core function, you might consider reviewing the relevant Video.js source code. This is generally not necessary for most users.