Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
118 lines (94 loc) · 9.02 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

118 lines (94 loc) · 9.02 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for bang590/jspatch

Objective: Attacker's Goal: To compromise application that use given project by exploiting weaknesses or vulnerabilities within the project itself.

Attack Tree Visualization

Compromise Application via JSPatch Exploitation [CR]
├───[1.0] Compromise Patch Delivery Mechanism [CR]
│   └───[1.1] Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) Attack [HR] [CR]
│       └───[1.1.1] Network Sniffing (Unsecured Network) [HR]
│           └───[1.1.1.1] Intercept Patch Request & Inject Malicious Patch [HR]
├───[1.2] Compromise Patch Server Directly [CR]
│   ├───[1.2.1] Exploit Server Vulnerabilities (Web Server, API Endpoints) [HR]
│   │   └───[1.2.1.1] Gain Access to Patch Storage & Replace Patches [HR]
│   └───[1.2.3] Social Engineering/Phishing (Target Server Admins) [HR]
│       └───[1.2.3.1] Obtain Credentials to Access & Modify Patches [HR]
├───[2.0] Exploit Lack of Patch Validation/Integrity Checks [CR]
│   └───[2.1] No Signature Verification [HR] [CR]
│       └───[2.1.1] Application Accepts Unsigned Patches [HR]
│           └───[2.1.1.1] Inject Malicious Patch via Compromised Delivery (See 1.0) [HR]
└───[4.0] Social Engineering Targeting Developers/Deployment Process [CR]
    └───[4.1] Compromise Developer Accounts [HR]
        └───[4.1.1] Phishing/Credential Theft [HR]
            └───[4.1.1.1] Gain Access to Patch Deployment Tools/Processes [HR]

Attack Tree Path: Compromise Application via JSPatch Exploitation [CR]

  • Description: This is the root goal of the attacker. Success means gaining unauthorized control over the application's behavior and potentially user data through JSPatch vulnerabilities.
  • Why Critical: Represents the ultimate security failure related to JSPatch usage.

Attack Tree Path: Compromise Patch Delivery Mechanism [CR]

  • Description: Targeting the system responsible for delivering JSPatch updates to the application.
  • Why Critical: Successful compromise allows the attacker to inject malicious patches into the application update stream, affecting all users receiving updates.

Attack Tree Path: Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) Attack [HR] [CR]

  • Description: Intercepting network communication between the application and the patch server to manipulate patch delivery.
  • Why High-Risk: Relatively easy to execute, especially on unsecured networks. High impact as it allows direct injection of malicious code.
  • Attack Vectors within MITM:
    • [1.1.1] Network Sniffing (Unsecured Network) [HR]:
      • Description: Passive interception of network traffic on an unsecured network (e.g., public Wi-Fi).
      • Why High-Risk: Common scenario, requires minimal attacker resources.
      • [1.1.1.1] Intercept Patch Request & Inject Malicious Patch [HR]:
        • Description: Actively modifying intercepted network traffic to replace a legitimate patch with a malicious one.
        • Why High-Risk: Direct and effective way to inject malicious code if HTTPS is not used.

Attack Tree Path: Compromise Patch Server Directly [CR]

  • Description: Directly attacking the server infrastructure hosting and managing JSPatch files.
  • Why Critical: Bypasses client-side security measures and grants the attacker control over the source of patches.

Attack Tree Path: Exploit Server Vulnerabilities (Web Server, API Endpoints) [HR]

  • Description: Exploiting security weaknesses in the web server software, API endpoints, or application logic of the patch server.
  • Why High-Risk: Web server vulnerabilities are common, and successful exploitation can lead to full server compromise.
  • Attack Vectors within Server Vulnerabilities:
    • [1.2.1] Exploit Server Vulnerabilities (Web Server, API Endpoints) [HR]:
      • Description: Identifying and exploiting known or zero-day vulnerabilities in server software.
      • Why High-Risk: Common attack vector against web applications.
      • [1.2.1.1] Gain Access to Patch Storage & Replace Patches [HR]:
        • Description: Using exploited vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access to the server's file system and replace legitimate JSPatch files with malicious ones.
        • Why High-Risk: Direct control over patches, widespread impact.

Attack Tree Path: Social Engineering/Phishing (Target Server Admins) [HR]

  • Description: Manipulating server administrators into revealing their credentials or performing actions that compromise the patch server.
  • Why High-Risk: Human factor is often a weak link, social engineering can be very effective.
  • Attack Vectors within Social Engineering:
    • [1.2.3] Social Engineering/Phishing (Target Server Admins) [HR]:
      • Description: Using deceptive tactics like phishing emails or phone calls to trick server administrators.
      • Why High-Risk: Exploits human psychology, can bypass technical security controls.
      • [1.2.3.1] Obtain Credentials to Access & Modify Patches [HR]:
        • Description: Stealing administrator credentials through social engineering to gain access to the patch server and modify patches.
        • Why High-Risk: Direct access to patch management, widespread impact.

Attack Tree Path: Exploit Lack of Patch Validation/Integrity Checks [CR]

  • Description: Taking advantage of the absence or weakness of mechanisms to verify the authenticity and integrity of JSPatch patches.
  • Why Critical: Without validation, any successful compromise of delivery or server becomes immediately exploitable for malicious patch injection.

Attack Tree Path: No Signature Verification [HR] [CR]

  • Description: The application does not verify any digital signature or checksum of the downloaded patches.
  • Why High-Risk: Fundamental security flaw, allows trivial injection of malicious patches if delivery is compromised.
  • Attack Vectors within No Signature Verification:
    • [2.1] No Signature Verification [HR]:
      • Description: Lack of any mechanism to verify patch authenticity.
      • Why High-Risk: Completely reliant on delivery mechanism security, which is often insufficient.
      • [2.1.1] Application Accepts Unsigned Patches [HR]:
        • Description: Application processes and executes patches without any validation.
        • Why High-Risk: Directly enables malicious patch injection.
        • [2.1.1.1] Inject Malicious Patch via Compromised Delivery (See 1.0) [HR]:
          • Description: Combining lack of signature verification with a compromised delivery mechanism (like MITM or server compromise) to inject and execute malicious code.
          • Why High-Risk: Easiest and most direct path to application compromise if signature verification is missing.

Attack Tree Path: Social Engineering Targeting Developers/Deployment Process [CR]

  • Description: Targeting the human element in the development and deployment of JSPatch patches.
  • Why Critical: Human error and manipulation can bypass even strong technical security measures.

Attack Tree Path: Compromise Developer Accounts [HR]

  • Description: Gaining unauthorized access to developer accounts that have privileges to manage and deploy JSPatch patches.
  • Why High-Risk: Developers often have elevated privileges, compromising their accounts can lead to significant security breaches.
  • Attack Vectors within Compromise Developer Accounts:
    • [4.1] Compromise Developer Accounts [HR]:
      • Description: Targeting developer accounts through various methods.
      • Why High-Risk: Direct access to patch deployment processes.
      • [4.1.1] Phishing/Credential Theft [HR]:
        • Description: Using phishing or other credential theft techniques to steal developer login credentials.
        • Why High-Risk: Common and effective way to compromise accounts.
      • [4.1.1.1] Gain Access to Patch Deployment Tools/Processes [HR]:
        • Description: Using compromised developer accounts to access patch deployment systems and inject malicious patches.
        • Why High-Risk: Direct path to malicious patch deployment, potentially affecting all users.