Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
58 lines (43 loc) · 4.85 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

58 lines (43 loc) · 4.85 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for flipboard/flanimatedimage

Objective: To execute arbitrary code within the context of an application using flanimatedimage by exploiting vulnerabilities in the library's handling of animated image data (specifically GIF and APNG).

Attack Tree Visualization

Compromise Application using flanimatedimage
    |
    └── 1. Execute Arbitrary Code (HIGH)
        |
        ├── 1.1 Buffer Overflow (HIGH)
        │   └── 1.1.1 Crafted GIF/APNG Header (HIGH)
        |
        └── 1.2 Integer Overflow (HIGH)
            └── 1.2.1 Malformed GIF/APNG Dimensions (HIGH)

Attack Tree Path: 1. Execute Arbitrary Code (HIGH)

  • 1. Execute Arbitrary Code (HIGH): This is the primary goal of a sophisticated attacker, as it grants the most control over the compromised application and potentially the underlying system.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1 Buffer Overflow (HIGH)

  • 1.1 Buffer Overflow (HIGH):
    • Description: A buffer overflow occurs when data is written beyond the allocated memory buffer, overwriting adjacent memory regions. This can corrupt data, crash the application, or, most critically, allow an attacker to inject and execute malicious code.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.1 Crafted GIF/APNG Header (HIGH)

  • 1.1.1 Crafted GIF/APNG Header (HIGH):
    • Mechanism: The attacker crafts a malicious GIF or APNG file with a manipulated header. This could involve:
      • Oversized Width/Height: Specifying image dimensions that are excessively large. When the library allocates memory based on these dimensions, it might allocate a buffer that's too small for the actual image data, leading to an overflow when the data is copied.
      • Invalid Color Table Size: The GIF format uses a color table. A maliciously crafted header could specify an incorrect color table size, causing the parser to read or write beyond the allocated buffer.
      • Corrupted Control Blocks: GIF and APNG have control blocks (e.g., Graphic Control Extension, Application Extension) that contain metadata about frames, delays, and disposal methods. Manipulating these blocks can lead to out-of-bounds reads or writes.
      • Exploitation: By carefully crafting the overflow, the attacker can overwrite the return address on the stack, redirecting execution flow to their own malicious code (shellcode). This shellcode could then perform any action the attacker desires.
    • Likelihood: High. Image parsing is complex, and historical vulnerabilities in image libraries demonstrate the feasibility of this attack.
    • Impact: High. Complete system compromise is possible.
    • Effort: Medium to High. Requires understanding of memory layout, assembly language, and exploit development techniques.
    • Skill Level: High. Requires expertise in exploit development and reverse engineering.
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High. Modern OS defenses (ASLR, DEP) make exploitation harder, but not impossible. Sophisticated exploits can be stealthy.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2 Integer Overflow (HIGH)

  • 1.2 Integer Overflow (HIGH):
    • Description: An integer overflow occurs when an arithmetic operation results in a value that is too large to be stored in the allocated integer type. This can lead to unexpected behavior, including buffer overflows.

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.1 Malformed GIF/APNG Dimensions (HIGH)

  • 1.2.1 Malformed GIF/APNG Dimensions (HIGH):
    • Mechanism: The attacker provides a GIF or APNG with extremely large width or height values. The library might perform calculations like width * height * bytes_per_pixel to determine the required buffer size. If width or height are large enough, the multiplication can overflow, resulting in a small, insufficient buffer size. When the image data is later copied into this small buffer, a buffer overflow occurs.
    • Exploitation: Similar to 1.1.1, the resulting buffer overflow can be used to overwrite the return address and execute arbitrary code.
    • Likelihood: High. Integer overflows are common programming errors, especially when dealing with user-supplied data that can be arbitrarily large.
    • Impact: High. Complete system compromise is possible.
    • Effort: Medium to High. Similar to buffer overflows, but the attacker needs to understand how the library performs size calculations.
    • Skill Level: High. Requires expertise in exploit development and reverse engineering.
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High. Similar to buffer overflows.