Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
43 lines (38 loc) · 5.62 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

43 lines (38 loc) · 5.62 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for ethereum-lists/chains

Attack Surface: Data Integrity Compromise (Supply Chain Attack) - Critical to High

  • Description: Malicious modification of data within the ethereum-lists/chains repository itself, leading to the distribution of compromised blockchain network information to applications consuming the data. This is a supply chain attack because the data source itself is compromised.
  • How chains contributes to the attack surface: Applications rely on chains as a trusted source of truth for critical blockchain connection details (RPC URLs, explorer URLs, chain IDs, etc.). Compromising this data source directly poisons the well for all dependent applications.
  • Example: An attacker compromises a maintainer account or gains write access to the repository and modifies the rpc URLs for a widely used chain (e.g., Ethereum Mainnet) to point to attacker-controlled servers. Applications fetching this updated data will unknowingly direct users to these malicious RPC nodes.
  • Impact:
    • Critical: Theft of user private keys if users connect wallets and sign transactions through malicious RPC nodes.
    • Critical: Transaction manipulation (front-running, censorship, transaction replacement) via malicious RPC nodes, leading to financial loss.
    • High: Phishing attacks through redirection to fake explorer websites designed to steal credentials or private keys.
    • High: Widespread disruption and loss of trust in applications relying on the compromised data.
  • Risk Severity: Critical to High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Developers:
      • Rigorous Data Validation: Implement strong validation checks on all data fetched from chains. Verify data integrity against known good states or use checksums (if available, consider requesting them from repository maintainers).
      • Continuous Monitoring & Updates: Regularly update the local data copy and actively monitor the ethereum-lists/chains repository for suspicious changes, commits, or security announcements.
      • Fallback Data Sources: Maintain backup data sources or locally curated data for critical chain information to use if the primary repository is suspected to be compromised or unavailable.
      • Code Review of Data Processing: Conduct thorough code reviews of all code that processes data from chains to ensure robust handling and prevent vulnerabilities from unexpected data.
    • Users: (Indirectly affected, rely on developer mitigations)
      • Choose applications from reputable developers known for security practices and data integrity.
      • Exercise caution with new or less established applications that depend on external data sources.

Attack Surface: Malicious Pull Request Injection - High

  • Description: Attackers submit pull requests to the ethereum-lists/chains repository containing malicious data modifications. If these pull requests are merged by maintainers without sufficient scrutiny, the malicious data becomes part of the official data source.
  • How chains contributes to the attack surface: The open contribution model of GitHub repositories, while beneficial, introduces the risk of malicious contributions slipping through the review process, especially if maintainer resources are limited or review processes are not sufficiently robust.
  • Example: An attacker submits a pull request that subtly alters the explorer URL for a chain to a visually identical phishing site. If maintainers miss this subtle change during review and merge the PR, applications using the updated data will unknowingly redirect users to the phishing site.
  • Impact:
    • High: Phishing attacks via malicious explorer URLs, potentially leading to credential or private key theft.
    • High: Redirection to malicious RPC nodes if RPC URLs are tampered with in pull requests, enabling transaction manipulation or key theft.
    • Medium (escalating to High in some contexts): Introduction of incorrect or misleading chain information that could cause user errors, confusion, or indirect security issues.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Repository Maintainers:
      • Strict and Multi-Layered Pull Request Review: Implement a rigorous pull request review process involving multiple reviewers, automated checks for suspicious patterns, and manual inspection of all data changes, especially URLs and critical identifiers.
      • Maintainer Vigilance and Training: Emphasize security awareness and vigilance among maintainers reviewing pull requests. Provide training on identifying potential malicious data injections.
      • Community Review and Auditing: Encourage community review of pull requests, especially for sensitive data changes. Consider periodic security audits of the repository data.
      • Code Owners/Dedicated Reviewers: Assign specific code owners or dedicated reviewers responsible for scrutinizing data-related pull requests.
    • Developers (consuming the data):
      • Data Validation (as above): Implement robust data validation within applications to detect anomalies or inconsistencies, even if they pass through the repository review process.
      • Report Suspicious Data: If you detect data discrepancies or suspect malicious modifications compared to known good information, promptly report it to the ethereum-lists/chains repository maintainers.