Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
52 lines (43 loc) · 6.36 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

52 lines (43 loc) · 6.36 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for bang590/jspatch

Attack Surface: 1. Remote Code Execution (RCE) via Malicious Patch Injection

  • Description: An attacker gains the ability to execute arbitrary code within the application's context by injecting a malicious JavaScript patch.
  • How JSPatch Contributes: JSPatch is the direct mechanism for this attack. It provides the functionality to load and execute externally sourced JavaScript, which is the core of the RCE vulnerability.
  • Example: An attacker compromises the patch distribution server and replaces a legitimate patch with one containing malicious code to steal user data, install malware, or take control of the application.
  • Impact: Complete application compromise, data theft, potential device compromise, financial loss, reputational damage.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Patch Signing and Verification: Digitally sign patches on the server; the app must verify the signature before execution. Use strong cryptographic algorithms.
    • Strict HTTPS with Certificate Pinning: Enforce HTTPS and use certificate pinning to prevent Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks that could intercept and modify patches.
    • Hardcoded Patch Source URL: Avoid dynamic URL resolution; hardcode the trusted patch server URL(s) within the application.
    • Secure Patch Storage: Store downloaded patches in a secure, sandboxed location within the application, preventing tampering by other apps or processes.
    • Runtime Application Self-Protection (RASP): Consider using a RASP solution to detect and prevent runtime code modifications, even those initiated by JSPatch.

Attack Surface: 2. Security Control Bypass via Method Swizzling/Overriding

  • Description: An attacker uses a malicious patch to disable or circumvent security features built into the application by overriding or modifying existing Objective-C methods.
  • How JSPatch Contributes: JSPatch's core functionality allows it to directly override Objective-C methods. This is the primary way it achieves its patching capabilities, and it's also the direct enabler of this attack.
  • Example: A patch overrides the isJailbroken method (or similar jailbreak detection logic) to always return false, allowing the app to run on a compromised device and potentially access sensitive data that should be protected. Another example: bypassing in-app purchase validation by overriding the relevant methods.
  • Impact: Increased vulnerability to other attacks, unauthorized access to features or data, potential financial loss (if bypassing payment checks).
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Critical Logic in Native Code (with Anti-Tampering): Implement the most crucial security checks (jailbreak detection, core authentication) in native code and employ techniques to make them resistant to patching (e.g., obfuscation, integrity checks, anti-debugging). This raises the bar significantly.
    • Redundant Security Checks: Implement security checks in both native code and JavaScript (if applicable). Even if the JavaScript check is bypassed via JSPatch, the native check might still catch the attacker.
    • RASP: Use a RASP solution to detect and prevent unauthorized modifications to security-critical methods.

Attack Surface: 3. Data Exfiltration via API Abuse

  • Description: A malicious patch leverages JSPatch's access to Objective-C APIs to access and transmit sensitive user data or application data to an attacker-controlled server.
  • How JSPatch Contributes: JSPatch provides the bridge to Objective-C APIs. Without JSPatch, accessing these APIs from externally loaded JavaScript would be impossible in a standard iOS application. This access is essential for the attack.
  • Example: A patch uses JSPatch to call Keychain APIs to retrieve stored credentials and then uses network APIs (also accessible via JSPatch) to send those credentials to a malicious server. Another example: overriding network request methods to intercept and exfiltrate data.
  • Impact: Data breach, privacy violation, identity theft, financial loss, reputational damage.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Principle of Least Privilege (App Permissions): Ensure the application requests only the minimum necessary permissions from the operating system. This limits the scope of what a malicious patch can access.
    • Data Encryption: Encrypt sensitive data both at rest (in storage) and in transit (during network communication). Even if exfiltrated, the data is useless without the decryption key.
    • Secure Coding Practices (Native Code): Follow secure coding guidelines in the native code to prevent vulnerabilities that could be exploited by a malicious patch to gain unauthorized access to data.
    • Network Security (HTTPS with Pinning): Use HTTPS with certificate pinning for all communication involving sensitive data. This prevents MitM attacks that could intercept data.

Attack Surface: 4. Downgrade Attacks (Reintroducing Vulnerabilities)

  • Description: Forcing the application to use an older, vulnerable version of a patch.
  • How JSPatch Contributes: If version control is not properly enforced by the application logic that uses JSPatch, then JSPatch itself becomes the tool used to load and execute the older, vulnerable patch. The vulnerability isn't in JSPatch itself, but in how it's used.
  • Example: An attacker intercepts the patch download and provides an older patch file with a known vulnerability.
  • Impact: Reintroduction of previously patched vulnerabilities.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Strict Version Control: Implement robust versioning. The app must only apply patches with a version number greater than or equal to the current version. Reject older versions. This logic is outside of JSPatch itself, but is critical for secure use of JSPatch.
    • Signed Metadata: Include version information in digitally signed metadata.