Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
172 lines (123 loc) · 8.42 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

172 lines (123 loc) · 8.42 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for sparkle-project/sparkle

Mitigation Strategy: 1. Digitally Sign the Appcast File

  • Description:

    1. Obtain a code-signing certificate specifically for signing updates (separate from development certificates).
    2. Securely store the private key (ideally in an HSM, otherwise an offline, air-gapped machine).
    3. Use a signing tool (e.g., codesign) to digitally sign the appcast XML file.
    4. In your application's Info.plist, set the SUPublicEDKey key to the public key (Base64-encoded) corresponding to your signing certificate. This is crucial for Sparkle to verify the signature.
    5. Implement a key rotation policy and document the revocation process.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Appcast Tampering (Critical): Prevents modification of the appcast to point to a malicious update. Sparkle will refuse to use an unsigned or invalidly signed appcast.
    • Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks (High): Even with HTTPS, a compromised server could serve a modified appcast. Signature verification by Sparkle prevents this.
    • Spoofing Attacks (High): Prevents attackers from creating a fake, seemingly legitimate appcast.

  • Impact:

    • Appcast Tampering: Risk reduced to near zero (with proper key management).
    • MitM Attacks: Significantly reduces risk, especially if the server is compromised.
    • Spoofing Attacks: Risk reduced to near zero.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Info.plist contains the SUPublicEDKey.
    • Build script signs the appcast using codesign and a dedicated certificate.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • No formal key rotation policy.
    • Private key is not in an HSM.

Mitigation Strategy: 2. Digitally Sign the Update Package

  • Description:

    1. Use the same code-signing certificate used for the appcast.
    2. Integrate signing into your build pipeline. After creating the update package, sign it using the appropriate tool.
    3. Ensure the signature is embedded within the update package.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Update Package Tampering (Critical): Prevents modification of the update package. Sparkle verifies this signature before installation.
    • Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks (High): Even if intercepted, the package cannot be modified without invalidating the signature that Sparkle checks.

  • Impact:

    • Update Package Tampering: Risk reduced to near zero (with proper key management).
    • MitM Attacks: Significantly reduces risk.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Build script signs the update package using the same certificate as the appcast.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • None.

Mitigation Strategy: 3. Enforce HTTPS for All Sparkle Communications

  • Description:

    1. Ensure the SUFeedURL in your Info.plist uses https://. This is a direct Sparkle configuration.
    2. Ensure all URLs within the appcast (e.g., update package URL) also use https://. This affects how Sparkle fetches updates.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks (High): Prevents interception and modification of Sparkle's network requests (appcast and update downloads).

  • Impact:

    • MitM Attacks: Very high risk reduction.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • SUFeedURL uses https://.
    • Update package URLs in the appcast use https://.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • None (from Sparkle's perspective; server-side redirects are a separate concern).

Mitigation Strategy: 4. Use a Monotonically Increasing Versioning Scheme

  • Description:

    1. Adopt a consistent versioning scheme (e.g., SemVer: major.minor.patch).
    2. Ensure every new release has a version number strictly greater than the previous one. This is directly used by Sparkle's version comparison logic.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Downgrade Attacks (High): Prevents Sparkle from installing older, potentially vulnerable versions. Sparkle relies on this version comparison.

  • Impact:

    • Downgrade Attacks: Very high risk reduction; Sparkle has built-in protection.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • The project uses SemVer.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • None.

Mitigation Strategy: 5. Thoroughly Vet Any Custom Code (Delegates)

  • Description:

    1. If using custom Sparkle delegates (for custom unarchiving, installation, etc.), perform a thorough security review.
    2. Use static and dynamic analysis tools.
    3. Follow secure coding practices.
    4. Keep custom code minimal. This directly impacts the security of Sparkle's extended functionality.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Arbitrary Code Execution (Critical): Vulnerabilities in custom delegates could allow attackers to execute code.
    • Privilege Escalation (High): If delegates run with elevated privileges, vulnerabilities could lead to privilege escalation.

  • Impact:

    • Arbitrary Code Execution: Risk reduction depends on the review and testing quality.
    • Privilege Escalation: Risk reduction depends on the review and testing quality.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • The project does not use any custom Sparkle delegates.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • N/A (no custom delegates).

Mitigation Strategy: 6. Keep Sparkle Updated

  • Description:

    1. Regularly check for updates to the Sparkle framework itself.
    2. Update to the latest stable release promptly.
    3. Monitor the Sparkle project for security advisories. This is about keeping the library itself secure.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Exploitation of Sparkle Vulnerabilities (High): New releases often contain security fixes.

  • Impact:

    • Exploitation of Sparkle Vulnerabilities: Significantly reduces the risk of known vulnerabilities within Sparkle.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • A process exists to check for Sparkle updates.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Updates are not always applied immediately.

Mitigation Strategy: 7. Handle Sparkle Errors Gracefully

  • Description:

    1. Implement error handling in your application to catch errors reported by Sparkle.
    2. Display user-friendly error messages (without sensitive information).
    3. Log errors securely. This is about how your application responds to Sparkle's error conditions.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Information Disclosure (Low): Prevents sensitive information leakage through error messages.
    • Denial of Service (Low): Can prevent crashes due to update failures.

  • Impact:

    • Information Disclosure: Low risk reduction.
    • Denial of Service: Low risk reduction.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Basic error handling exists.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Error logging is not comprehensive.
    • No user reporting mechanism.

Mitigation Strategy: 8. Secure Delta Updates (If Used)

  • Description:

    1. If using delta updates, ensure the delta update mechanism uses digital signatures recognized by Sparkle.
    2. The appcast should include a hash of the delta update file, used by Sparkle for verification.
    3. Sparkle should verify the signature and hash before applying the delta.
    4. The patching process (applying the delta) must be secure.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Tampering with Delta Update (Critical): Prevents attackers from modifying the delta update.
    • Vulnerabilities in Patching Process (Critical): Ensures the patching process itself is secure.

  • Impact:

    • Tampering with Delta Update: Risk reduced to near zero if implemented correctly.
    • Vulnerabilities in Patching Process: Depends on the security of the patching code.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • The project does not use delta updates.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • N/A (delta updates not used).