Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
104 lines (89 loc) · 9.17 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

104 lines (89 loc) · 9.17 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for cymchad/baserecyclerviewadapterhelper

Objective: Compromise Application using BaseRecyclerViewAdapterHelper (Focusing on High-Risk Areas)

Attack Tree Visualization

Compromise Application using BaseRecyclerViewAdapterHelper (Root)

├── 1. Data Exfiltration (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ ├── 1.1 Exploit Item Click Listener Vulnerability (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ │ ├── 1.1.1 Inject malicious code into click handler (AND) │ │ │ ├── 1.1.1.1 Find an item click listener that exposes data. [CRITICAL] │ │ │ ├── 1.1.1.2 Craft malicious code to extract the exposed data. │ │ │ ├── 1.1.1.3 Trigger the click listener. │ │ ├── 1.1.2 Bypass data obfuscation/encryption (AND) │ │ │ ├── 1.1.2.2 Develop a method to reverse or bypass the protection. [CRITICAL] │ ├── 1.2 Exploit Data Binding Vulnerability (if used) (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ │ ├── 1.2.1 Inject malicious code into data binding expressions (AND) │ │ │ ├── 1.2.1.1 Identify vulnerable data binding expressions. [CRITICAL] │ │ │ ├── 1.2.1.2 Craft malicious code to access and exfiltrate data. │ │ ├── 1.2.2 Bypass data binding security mechanisms (AND) │ │ │ ├── 1.2.2.2 Develop a bypass technique. [CRITICAL]

├── 2. Data Modification (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ ├── 2.1 Exploit Item Click/Long Click Listener (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ │ ├── 2.1.1 Inject malicious code to modify data on click/long click (AND) │ │ │ ├── 2.1.1.1 Identify listeners that handle data updates. [CRITICAL] │ │ │ ├── 2.1.1.2 Craft malicious code to alter data before submission. │ │ │ ├── 2.1.1.3 Trigger the click/long click event. │ ├── 2.2 Exploit Data Binding (if used) (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ │ ├── 2.2.1 Inject malicious code to modify data through binding expressions (AND) │ │ │ ├── 2.2.1.1 Identify vulnerable data binding expressions. [CRITICAL] │ │ │ ├── 2.2.1.2 Craft malicious code to modify data. │ ├── 2.3 Exploit Custom View Input Handling (OR) [HIGH RISK] │ ├── 2.3.1 Inject malicious input into custom view fields (AND) │ │ ├── 2.3.1.2 Find vulnerabilities in input validation or sanitization. [CRITICAL] │ │ ├── 2.3.1.3 Craft malicious input to modify data. │ ├── 2.3.2 Bypass input validation in custom view logic (AND) │ ├── 2.3.2.2 Develop a bypass technique. [CRITICAL]

Attack Tree Path: 1. Data Exfiltration

  • 1.1 Exploit Item Click Listener Vulnerability:

    • Description: Attackers exploit vulnerabilities in the code that handles item clicks within the RecyclerView. This is a common attack vector because click listeners often directly access and manipulate data associated with the clicked item.
    • Critical Node 1.1.1.1: Find an item click listener that exposes data.
      • Attack Vector: The attacker examines the application's code (if available) or uses debugging tools to identify click listeners associated with RecyclerView items. They look for listeners that receive data as parameters or access data from the item's view or model.
      • Mitigation:
        • Minimize the data passed to click listeners. Only pass the minimum necessary information (e.g., an item ID instead of the entire item object).
        • Avoid directly exposing sensitive data within the click listener's scope.
        • Use a mediator pattern or similar approach to decouple the click listener from the data source.
    • Critical Node 1.1.2.2: Develop a method to reverse or bypass data obfuscation/encryption.
      • Attack Vector: If the data is obfuscated or encrypted, the attacker attempts to reverse the process. This might involve analyzing the application's code to understand the obfuscation/encryption algorithm or looking for weaknesses in the implementation (e.g., hardcoded keys, weak algorithms).
      • Mitigation:
        • If client-side obfuscation is used, understand that it's primarily a deterrent and not a strong security measure.
        • If encryption is used, use strong, industry-standard algorithms and manage keys securely (avoid hardcoding keys). Consider server-side encryption where possible.

  • 1.2 Exploit Data Binding Vulnerability (if used):

    • Description: If the application uses a data binding framework, attackers may attempt to inject malicious code into binding expressions. This can allow them to access and exfiltrate data or even execute arbitrary code.
    • Critical Node 1.2.1.1: Identify vulnerable data binding expressions.
      • Attack Vector: The attacker examines the application's code and layout files to identify data binding expressions. They look for expressions that evaluate user-provided data or that could be manipulated to access sensitive data.
      • Mitigation:
        • Use a secure data binding framework that provides built-in protection against expression injection.
        • Avoid evaluating user-provided data directly in binding expressions. Use safe methods for displaying user input.
        • Implement strict input validation and sanitization before data is used in binding expressions.
    • Critical Node 1.2.2.2: Develop a bypass technique.
      • Attack Vector: If the data binding framework has security mechanisms (e.g., input validation), the attacker tries to find ways to bypass them. This might involve crafting specific input that exploits weaknesses in the validation logic.
      • Mitigation:
        • Rely on the framework's built-in security features whenever possible.
        • Implement custom validation logic that is robust and difficult to bypass.
        • Regularly update the data binding framework to the latest version to benefit from security patches.

Attack Tree Path: 2. Data Modification

  • 2.1 Exploit Item Click/Long Click Listener:

    • Description: Similar to data exfiltration, attackers can exploit click/long-click listeners to modify data. This is a high-risk area because these listeners often handle user actions that update data.
    • Critical Node 2.1.1.1: Identify listeners that handle data updates.
      • Attack Vector: The attacker examines the application's code or uses debugging tools to identify click/long-click listeners that are responsible for updating data. They look for listeners that send data to a server, update a local database, or modify the application's state.
      • Mitigation:
        • Implement strict input validation and sanitization within the click/long-click listener before any data is modified.
        • Use server-side validation to ensure that data modifications are legitimate, even if the client-side validation is bypassed.
        • Consider using a command pattern or similar approach to encapsulate data modification operations and enforce security checks.

  • 2.2 Exploit Data Binding (if used):

    • Description: Similar to data exfiltration, data binding vulnerabilities can be exploited to modify data.
    • Critical Node 2.2.1.1: Identify vulnerable data binding expressions.
      • Attack Vector: The attacker examines the application's code and layout files to identify data binding expressions that are used to update data. They look for expressions that are bound to input fields or that could be manipulated to modify data.
      • Mitigation: (Same as 1.2.1.1 - use secure framework, avoid direct evaluation, strict input validation)

  • 2.3 Exploit Custom View Input Handling:

    • Description: If the RecyclerView uses custom views that contain input fields (e.g., EditText, CheckBox), attackers may attempt to inject malicious input to modify data.
    • Critical Node 2.3.1.2: Find vulnerabilities in input validation or sanitization.
      • Attack Vector: The attacker examines the custom view's code to identify how input is handled. They look for weaknesses in input validation or sanitization that could allow them to inject malicious data.
      • Mitigation:
        • Implement rigorous input validation and sanitization within the custom view's code.
        • Use appropriate input types (e.g., inputType="number" for numeric input) to restrict the allowed characters.
        • Consider using server-side validation to ensure data integrity.
    • Critical Node 2.3.2.2: Develop a bypass technique.
      • Attack Vector: If input validation is present, the attacker tries to find ways to bypass it. This might involve crafting specific input that exploits weaknesses in the validation logic.
      • Mitigation:
        • Implement robust input validation that is difficult to bypass. Use whitelisting instead of blacklisting whenever possible.
        • Regularly test the input validation logic with various types of malicious input.