Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
96 lines (81 loc) · 9.65 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

96 lines (81 loc) · 9.65 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for mamaral/onboard

Attack Surface: Brute-force Attacks on Login Endpoint

  • Description: Attackers attempt to guess user credentials by repeatedly trying different username/password combinations against the /login endpoint.
  • Onboard Contribution: Onboard directly provides the /login endpoint as the core authentication mechanism. Lack of built-in rate limiting or account lockout within Onboard itself makes it vulnerable.
  • Example: An attacker scripts thousands of login attempts against Onboard's /login, bypassing weak or non-existent rate limiting and successfully guessing user credentials.
  • Impact: Unauthorized account access, data breaches, account takeover.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Implement Rate Limiting within Onboard: Developers using Onboard must implement rate limiting on the /login endpoint, ideally as part of Onboard's configuration or middleware.
    • Implement Account Lockout within Onboard: Onboard should provide or facilitate account lockout mechanisms after failed login attempts.
    • Strong Password Policies: Configure Onboard to enforce strong password policies.
    • Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Integrate MFA with Onboard to significantly increase login security.

Attack Surface: Credential Stuffing Attacks

  • Description: Attackers use lists of leaked usernames and passwords from other breaches to attempt logins on Onboard.
  • Onboard Contribution: While not directly caused by Onboard's code, Onboard's role as the authentication service makes it a direct target for credential stuffing. If Onboard doesn't offer mitigations, it contributes to the risk.
  • Example: Attackers use leaked credentials against Onboard's /login. If users reuse passwords, attackers gain access to Onboard-protected accounts.
  • Impact: Unauthorized account access, data breaches, account takeover.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Password Breach Monitoring (Integration with Onboard): Consider integrating password breach monitoring services with Onboard to warn users about compromised passwords.
    • Rate Limiting (as above): Onboard's rate limiting helps slow down stuffing attempts.
    • Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): MFA with Onboard is a strong defense against credential stuffing.
    • Educate Users (Best Practice encouraged by Onboard documentation): Onboard documentation should strongly encourage users to use unique passwords.

Attack Surface: Authentication Bypass Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Logical flaws or coding errors within Onboard's code allow attackers to bypass authentication and gain unauthorized access.
  • Onboard Contribution: Directly caused by vulnerabilities in Onboard's authentication logic, code flaws in handling authentication checks, session management, or token validation within Onboard itself.
  • Example: A coding error in Onboard's token verification allows manipulation of tokens to bypass authentication checks, granting access without valid credentials.
  • Impact: Complete compromise of authentication, unauthorized access to all protected resources, data breaches, system takeover.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Code Review of Onboard Code: Thorough security code reviews of Onboard's authentication logic are crucial.
    • Penetration Testing of Onboard: Dedicated penetration testing focusing on Onboard's authentication mechanisms.
    • Input Validation within Onboard: Robust input validation in Onboard's code to prevent manipulation of authentication parameters.
    • Principle of Least Privilege (Design Onboard with Least Privilege): Onboard's design should adhere to least privilege to minimize impact of bypasses.

Attack Surface: Authorization Bypass Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Flaws in Onboard's authorization logic allow users to access resources or actions they shouldn't, even after authentication.
  • Onboard Contribution: Directly caused by vulnerabilities in how Onboard manages and enforces authorization rules, permissions, or policies.
  • Example: A flaw in Onboard's role-checking mechanism allows a user with a limited role to access resources intended for administrators.
  • Impact: Unauthorized access to sensitive data, data manipulation, privilege escalation, system compromise.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Code Review of Onboard's Authorization Logic: Specifically review Onboard's authorization code for flaws.
    • Penetration Testing of Onboard's Authorization: Test Onboard's authorization mechanisms for bypasses and privilege escalation.
    • Principle of Least Privilege (Enforced by Onboard): Onboard should be designed to enforce strict access control based on least privilege.
    • Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) or Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC) Implemented by Onboard: Onboard should implement and enforce well-defined RBAC or ABAC models.
    • Regularly Audit Permissions Configured within Onboard: Regularly audit and review roles and permissions configured and managed by Onboard.

Attack Surface: Insecure Session Management

  • Description: Weaknesses in how Onboard manages sessions lead to session hijacking, fixation, or related attacks.
  • Onboard Contribution: Directly caused by insecure session handling within Onboard's code – how it creates, stores, validates, and invalidates sessions.
  • Example: Onboard uses predictable session IDs, or session cookies lack HttpOnly and Secure flags due to Onboard's implementation, making sessions vulnerable.
  • Impact: Session hijacking, account takeover, unauthorized access.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Generate Strong Session IDs within Onboard: Onboard must generate cryptographically secure session IDs.
    • Use HTTP-Only and Secure Flags in Onboard's Session Handling: Onboard must set HttpOnly and Secure flags for session cookies.
    • Session Timeout Configurable in Onboard: Onboard should allow configuration of session timeouts.
    • Session Invalidation on Logout Implemented by Onboard: Onboard must properly invalidate sessions on logout.
    • Secure Session Storage within Onboard: Onboard's session storage mechanism must be secure.

Attack Surface: Exposure of Sensitive Configuration Data

  • Description: Accidental exposure of configuration files or environment variables containing sensitive secrets required by Onboard.
  • Onboard Contribution: Onboard requires configuration, including sensitive secrets. If Onboard's documentation or default setup encourages insecure configuration practices, it contributes to this risk.
  • Example: Onboard's documentation suggests storing database credentials in a plain text configuration file that is then accidentally exposed.
  • Impact: Complete compromise of Onboard and potentially the application, data breaches, system takeover.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Environment Variables for Secrets (Best Practice emphasized by Onboard documentation): Onboard documentation should strongly recommend using environment variables for sensitive secrets.
    • Secure Configuration Management (Guidance from Onboard): Onboard documentation should provide guidance on secure configuration management practices.
    • Restrict Access to Configuration Files (Deployment Best Practice related to Onboard): Deployment guides for Onboard should emphasize restricting access to configuration files.
    • Avoid Committing Secrets to Version Control (General Best Practice relevant to Onboard deployment): Deployment guides should warn against committing secrets to version control.

Attack Surface: Vulnerabilities in Dependencies

  • Description: Onboard relies on third-party libraries. Vulnerabilities in these Onboard dependencies can be exploited.
  • Onboard Contribution: Directly dependent on the security of its chosen dependencies. If Onboard doesn't manage dependencies well or uses vulnerable libraries, it's directly affected.
  • Example: A critical vulnerability is found in a library Onboard uses for JWT handling. Attackers exploit this to bypass authentication in Onboard.
  • Impact: Varies, can be DoS, RCE, data breaches, depending on the dependency vulnerability.
  • Risk Severity: Medium to High (can be Critical depending on the specific vulnerability) - Included here due to potential for Critical impact.
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Dependency Scanning for Onboard's Dependencies: Regularly scan Onboard's dependencies for vulnerabilities.
    • Dependency Updates for Onboard: Keep Onboard's dependencies updated.
    • Vulnerability Monitoring for Onboard's Dependency Stack: Monitor for vulnerabilities in Onboard's dependencies.
    • Dependency Review for Onboard: Review Onboard's dependencies, remove unnecessary ones.
    • Software Composition Analysis (SCA) for Onboard: Use SCA tools to manage Onboard's dependencies.