Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
111 lines (95 loc) · 7.28 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

111 lines (95 loc) · 7.28 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for perwendel/spark

Objective: Compromise Spark Application

Attack Tree Visualization

Compromise Spark Application [CRITICAL NODE]
├─── 1. Exploit Spark Framework Vulnerabilities [HIGH RISK PATH]
│    ├─── 1.1.1. Path Traversal in Route Handling
│    │    └─── 1.1.1.1. Access Arbitrary Files via Crafted Route [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│    └─── 1.2.3. Lack of Security Best Practices Implementation [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│         └─── 1.2.3.1. Application Developer Fails to Secure Routes/Endpoints [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│    └─── 1.3. Dependency Vulnerabilities [HIGH RISK PATH]
│         └─── 1.3.2. Vulnerable Dependencies in Application Code [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│              └─── 1.3.2.1. Exploit Known Vulnerabilities in Application's Dependencies [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│    └─── 1.4. Code Execution Vulnerabilities [HIGH RISK PATH]
│         ├─── 1.4.1. Server-Side Template Injection [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│         │    └─── 1.4.1.1. Execute Arbitrary Code via Template Engine [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│         └─── 1.4.2. Deserialization Vulnerabilities [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
│              └─── 1.4.2.1. Execute Arbitrary Code via Insecure Deserialization [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
└─── 2. Exploit Application Logic Vulnerabilities [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
     └─── 2.1. Business Logic Flaws Exposed via Spark Routes [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
          └─── 2.1.1. Abuse of Application Functionality via Crafted Requests [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]
               └─── 2.1.1.1. Achieve Unauthorized Actions by Exploiting Route Logic [HIGH RISK PATH] [CRITICAL NODE]

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.1.1. Access Arbitrary Files via Crafted Route

  • Attack Vector: Path Traversal in Route Handling
  • Likelihood: Medium
  • Impact: High (Read arbitrary files, potential code execution if sensitive files accessed)
  • Effort: Low
  • Skill Level: Low
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Thoroughly review route handling logic for path traversal vulnerabilities.
    • Implement robust input validation and sanitization for route parameters used in file paths.
    • Avoid directly using user input to construct file paths.
    • Use whitelisting and secure file access methods.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.3.1. Application Developer Fails to Secure Routes/Endpoints

  • Attack Vector: Lack of Security Best Practices Implementation
  • Likelihood: High
  • Impact: High (Wide range of impacts depending on the specific vulnerability - data breach, code execution, etc.)
  • Effort: Varies (Low to High depending on the complexity of the vulnerability)
  • Skill Level: Varies (Low to High depending on the vulnerability)
  • Detection Difficulty: Varies (Low to High depending on the vulnerability and monitoring in place)
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Prioritize security training for developers on secure coding practices.
    • Implement mandatory security code reviews for all route handlers and application logic.
    • Utilize security linters and static analysis tools to identify potential vulnerabilities early in the development lifecycle.
    • Establish and enforce security best practices for all aspects of application development.

Attack Tree Path: 1.3.2.1. Exploit Known Vulnerabilities in Application's Dependencies

  • Attack Vector: Vulnerable Dependencies in Application Code
  • Likelihood: Medium to High
  • Impact: High (Code execution, data breach, DoS - depends on the vulnerable dependency)
  • Effort: Low to Medium
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Maintain a comprehensive inventory of all application dependencies.
    • Implement automated dependency scanning tools to regularly check for known vulnerabilities.
    • Establish a process for promptly updating vulnerable dependencies to patched versions.
    • Prioritize using dependencies from reputable sources and with active security maintenance.

Attack Tree Path: 1.4.1.1. Execute Arbitrary Code via Template Engine

  • Attack Vector: Server-Side Template Injection
  • Likelihood: Low to Medium (If application uses template engines and insecurely handles user input in templates)
  • Impact: High (Full server compromise, code execution)
  • Effort: Medium
  • Skill Level: Medium
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium
  • Actionable Insights:
    • If using template engines, thoroughly understand their security implications and best practices.
    • Never directly embed unsanitized user input into templates.
    • Utilize parameterized templates or ensure proper output encoding/escaping of user input within templates.
    • Conduct security testing specifically for template injection vulnerabilities.

Attack Tree Path: 1.4.2.1. Execute Arbitrary Code via Insecure Deserialization

  • Attack Vector: Deserialization Vulnerabilities
  • Likelihood: Low to Medium (If application deserializes untrusted data)
  • Impact: High (Full server compromise, code execution)
  • Effort: Medium to High
  • Skill Level: Medium to High
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Minimize or completely avoid deserializing data from untrusted sources.
    • If deserialization is necessary, use secure deserialization methods and libraries.
    • Implement robust validation and integrity checks for serialized data before deserialization.
    • Consider alternative data formats like JSON or XML that are generally safer than serialized objects for data exchange.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1.1.1. Achieve Unauthorized Actions by Exploiting Route Logic

  • Attack Vector: Abuse of Application Functionality via Crafted Requests
  • Likelihood: High
  • Impact: Varies (Medium to High - Data manipulation, unauthorized access, privilege escalation, financial loss)
  • Effort: Medium
  • Skill Level: Medium to High
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Design and implement route logic with a strong focus on security and the principle of least privilege.
    • Implement comprehensive input validation, authorization, and access controls for every route and endpoint.
    • Perform thorough business logic testing and security testing, including penetration testing and fuzzing, to identify and mitigate potential flaws.
    • Monitor application behavior and logs for suspicious activity that might indicate exploitation of business logic vulnerabilities.