Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
67 lines (56 loc) · 7.73 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

67 lines (56 loc) · 7.73 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for bang590/jspatch

Attack Surface: Compromised Patch Server (Delivery Infrastructure)

  • Description: The server hosting JavaScript patches is compromised, allowing attackers to replace legitimate patches with malicious ones.
  • JSPatch Contribution: JSPatch directly relies on fetching patches from a remote server. Compromising this server allows attackers to control the application's behavior via malicious patches delivered through JSPatch's mechanism.
  • Example: An attacker gains access to the patch server and replaces a legitimate patch with a JavaScript file that steals user credentials. When the application updates via JSPatch, it downloads and executes this malicious patch.
  • Impact: Widespread application compromise, data theft, user account takeover, malware distribution, reputational damage.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Server Infrastructure: Implement robust server security measures (strong access controls, regular security audits, patching, intrusion detection).
    • Principle of Least Privilege: Limit access to the patch server to only authorized personnel and systems.
    • Secure Development Practices: Use secure coding practices for server-side applications and infrastructure.
    • Regular Security Monitoring: Continuously monitor server logs and activity for suspicious behavior.
    • Supply Chain Security: Vet and secure all components of the patch server infrastructure and dependencies.

Attack Surface: Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) Attacks on Patch Download

  • Description: Attackers intercept and modify patch downloads during transit between the application and the patch server.
  • JSPatch Contribution: JSPatch's patch download process, if not secured, is directly vulnerable to network interception. JSPatch initiates the download, and if this process uses insecure protocols, it creates this attack surface.
  • Example: A user on a compromised network. The application attempts to download a patch over HTTP via JSPatch. An attacker intercepts the request, replaces the legitimate patch with a malicious one, and forwards it. JSPatch executes the malicious patch.
  • Impact: Application compromise, data theft, unauthorized access, malware injection, localized or widespread depending on the attack scale.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Enforce HTTPS: Always use HTTPS for patch downloads initiated by JSPatch to encrypt communication and prevent interception.
    • Certificate Pinning: Implement certificate pinning to ensure the application only trusts the legitimate patch server's certificate during JSPatch patch downloads.
    • VPN Usage (User-Side): Encourage users to use VPNs, especially on public networks, to encrypt their network traffic (user-side mitigation).

Attack Surface: Lack of Patch Integrity Verification

  • Description: The application does not verify the integrity and authenticity of downloaded patches, allowing execution of tampered patches.
  • JSPatch Contribution: If JSPatch integration lacks patch verification, the application directly executes any JavaScript code it receives, creating a vulnerability. JSPatch itself doesn't enforce verification unless implemented by the developer.
  • Example: Even with HTTPS, if the patch server is compromised, or a sophisticated MITM attack occurs, without integrity checks, JSPatch will accept and execute a modified patch containing malicious code.
  • Impact: Application compromise, data theft, code execution, bypassing other security measures, potential for persistent malware within the application.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Patch Signing: Digitally sign patches on the server before JSPatch downloads them.
    • Signature Verification: Implement signature verification in the application within the JSPatch integration before executing any patch.
    • Checksum Verification: Use checksums (like SHA-256) to verify patch integrity after download within the JSPatch process.
    • Secure Key Management: Properly manage and protect the private key used for signing patches.

Attack Surface: Unrestricted JavaScript Execution within Application Context

  • Description: Malicious JavaScript patches can execute arbitrary code within the application's JavaScript environment, gaining access to application resources and data.
  • JSPatch Contribution: JSPatch's core functionality is to execute JavaScript within the application context. This directly grants significant power to patches, making unrestricted execution a key attack surface introduced by JSPatch's design.
  • Example: A malicious patch, executed by JSPatch, uses JSPatch's bridge to access and exfiltrate user data stored in local storage or the keychain.
  • Impact: Data breaches, privacy violations, unauthorized access to sensitive functionalities, manipulation of application behavior, potential for further exploitation.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Minimize Patching Scope: Restrict the scope of what can be patched dynamically via JSPatch. Avoid patching security-critical or sensitive functionalities.
    • Input Validation and Sanitization (in Patches): Implement input validation and sanitization within JavaScript patches to prevent injection attacks and ensure data integrity.
    • Principle of Least Privilege (for Patches): Design patches with the minimum necessary permissions and access to application resources within the JSPatch context.
    • Code Review for Patches: Thoroughly review all patches for security vulnerabilities and malicious code before deployment via JSPatch.

Attack Surface: JSPatch Bridge Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Security flaws in the JSPatch bridge itself can be exploited by malicious patches to gain unintended access to native code or bypass security controls.
  • JSPatch Contribution: JSPatch's bridge is the direct mechanism that allows JavaScript patches to interact with native iOS code. Vulnerabilities in this specific bridge implementation are a direct attack surface introduced by using JSPatch.
  • Example: A vulnerability in the JSPatch bridge allows a malicious patch to bypass access controls and directly call a native API that should be restricted.
  • Impact: Privilege escalation, native code execution vulnerabilities, application crashes, complete application takeover, potential for system-level compromise in severe cases.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical (depending on the nature of the vulnerability)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Regular JSPatch Updates: Keep JSPatch library updated to the latest version to benefit from bug fixes and security patches in JSPatch itself.
    • Security Audits of JSPatch Integration: Conduct security audits specifically focusing on the JSPatch bridge and its interaction with native code in your application.
    • Static and Dynamic Analysis: Use static and dynamic analysis tools to identify potential vulnerabilities in the JSPatch bridge integration.
    • Report Vulnerabilities: If vulnerabilities are found in JSPatch itself, report them to the JSPatch maintainers (if the project is still actively maintained) or consider alternative patching solutions.