Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
99 lines (74 loc) · 10.2 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

99 lines (74 loc) · 10.2 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for briannesbitt/carbon

Mitigation Strategy: Regularly Update Carbon Library

  • Description:

    1. Utilize Composer for Dependency Management: Ensure your project uses Composer to manage PHP dependencies, including Carbon. This allows for easy updates and version tracking.
    2. Check for Carbon Updates Regularly: Use Composer commands like composer outdated briannesbitt/carbon or composer show -l briannesbitt/carbon to check for available updates to the Carbon library.
    3. Review Carbon Release Notes: When updates are available, carefully examine Carbon's release notes (available on GitHub or Packagist) to understand bug fixes, new features, and importantly, any security patches included in the new version.
    4. Update Carbon via Composer: Use composer update briannesbitt/carbon to update to the latest stable version of Carbon after reviewing release notes and confirming compatibility.
    5. Test Application After Update: Thoroughly test your application's date/time functionality after updating Carbon to ensure no regressions or compatibility issues have been introduced.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Carbon Dependency Vulnerabilities (High Severity): Outdated versions of Carbon may contain known security vulnerabilities that can be exploited. Updating mitigates these vulnerabilities. Severity is high as exploitation can lead to application compromise.

  • Impact:

    • Carbon Dependency Vulnerabilities: High Risk Reduction. Regularly updating Carbon directly patches known vulnerabilities within the library, significantly reducing the risk of exploitation.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Composer Dependency Management: Yes, Composer is used for dependency management.
    • Checking for Updates: Partially implemented. Developers are generally aware of updates but it's not a strictly enforced or scheduled process specifically for Carbon.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Scheduled Carbon Update Checks: No automated or scheduled process to specifically check for and prompt updates for the Carbon library.
    • Formalized Carbon Update Procedure: Lack of a documented procedure for reviewing Carbon release notes and testing after updates.

Mitigation Strategy: Utilize Carbon::createFromFormat() for Parsing

  • Description:

    1. Identify User Date/Time Input: Locate all instances where your application receives date/time input from users or external sources that will be parsed by Carbon.
    2. Determine Expected Date/Time Format: For each input point, define the precise expected date/time format (e.g., 'Y-m-d H:i:s', 'm/d/Y').
    3. Replace Carbon::parse() with Carbon::createFromFormat(): Instead of using Carbon::parse($userInput) which attempts to guess the format, use Carbon::createFromFormat($expectedFormat, $userInput). This explicitly tells Carbon the expected format.
    4. Implement Error Handling for Parsing Failures: Carbon::createFromFormat() returns false if parsing fails. Implement robust error handling to check for false return values and handle invalid input appropriately (e.g., reject input, display error message).

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities via Ambiguous Parsing (Medium Severity): Carbon::parse()'s format guessing can lead to misinterpretation of ambiguous date/time strings, potentially causing unexpected application behavior or logical errors. createFromFormat() eliminates this ambiguity. Severity is medium as it can lead to incorrect data processing and application logic flaws.
    • Potential for Unexpected Parsing Behavior (Medium Severity): Relying on Carbon::parse() with untrusted input can lead to unexpected parsing results if the input format is not what Carbon anticipates, potentially leading to vulnerabilities. Severity is medium as it can cause unpredictable application behavior.

  • Impact:

    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities: Medium Risk Reduction. Using createFromFormat() enforces a specific format, preventing misinterpretation of ambiguous input and reducing the risk of unexpected parsing behavior.
    • Unexpected Parsing Behavior: Medium Risk Reduction. Explicitly defining the format eliminates the guesswork of Carbon::parse(), making parsing more predictable and secure.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Carbon::createFromFormat() Usage: Inconsistently used. Some parts of the application use Carbon::parse() for simplicity, while createFromFormat() is used in more format-sensitive areas.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Consistent createFromFormat() Usage: Lack of consistent use of Carbon::createFromFormat() across all date/time parsing from external sources.
    • Code Review for Parsing Methods: No specific code review process to ensure createFromFormat() is used instead of parse() where appropriate for security.

Mitigation Strategy: Validate Timezone Strings Before Using with Carbon

  • Description:

    1. Identify Timezone Input Points for Carbon: Locate where timezone strings are accepted as input and used with Carbon's timezone functions (e.g., setTimezone(), timezone()).
    2. Create a Whitelist of Valid Timezones: Define a whitelist of allowed and valid IANA timezone names that your application supports. This list should be based on DateTimeZone::listIdentifiers().
    3. Validate Timezone Input Against Whitelist: Before passing a timezone string to Carbon, validate it against your whitelist. Ensure the input is a valid timezone identifier.
    4. Use Validated Timezone Strings with Carbon: Only use timezone strings that have passed validation with Carbon's timezone methods. Reject invalid timezone inputs and handle errors appropriately.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities - Timezones (Medium Severity): Passing invalid or unrecognized timezone strings to Carbon can lead to errors, exceptions, or unexpected behavior within Carbon's timezone handling. Severity is medium as it can disrupt application functionality related to timezones.
    • Logical Errors due to Invalid Timezones (Medium Severity): Using invalid timezones can lead to incorrect date/time calculations and logical errors in time-sensitive operations that rely on accurate timezone conversions within Carbon. Severity is medium as it can lead to data integrity issues and flawed application logic.

  • Impact:

    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities - Timezones: Medium Risk Reduction. Validating timezone strings prevents invalid inputs from reaching Carbon's timezone functions, reducing the risk of errors and unexpected behavior.
    • Logical Errors due to Invalid Timezones: Medium Risk Reduction. Ensuring only valid timezones are used with Carbon improves the reliability of timezone conversions and calculations, reducing logical errors.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Timezone Validation: Limited timezone validation exists, often relying on basic string checks rather than a comprehensive whitelist of valid IANA timezones.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Comprehensive Timezone Whitelist: Implementation of a complete whitelist of valid IANA timezone identifiers.
    • Strict Whitelist Validation: Enforcement of whitelist validation for all timezone inputs used with Carbon.

Mitigation Strategy: Test Carbon's Timezone Handling Extensively

  • Description:

    1. Focus Tests on Timezone-Sensitive Carbon Usage: Identify parts of your application that heavily rely on Carbon's timezone conversion and calculation features.
    2. Create Test Cases for Diverse Timezones: Develop test cases that cover a wide range of timezones, including:
      • UTC
      • Server's local timezone
      • Common user timezones relevant to your application's users.
      • Timezones with significant offsets (both positive and negative).
      • Timezones that undergo Daylight Saving Time (DST) transitions.
    3. Test DST Transition Scenarios with Carbon: Specifically design tests to verify Carbon's correct handling of DST transitions in different timezones, especially around the dates of DST changes.
    4. Automate Timezone Tests: Integrate these timezone-focused tests into your automated test suite to ensure consistent testing with every code change.

  • List of Threats Mitigated:

    • Logical Errors in Timezone Calculations (Medium to High Severity): Insufficient testing of Carbon's timezone handling can lead to undetected logical errors in date/time calculations, especially around DST transitions or in less common timezones. Severity can be high if errors affect critical business logic or security-related timestamps.
    • Data Integrity Issues due to Timezone Errors (Medium Severity): Timezone-related errors in Carbon can lead to data corruption or inconsistencies in stored date/time information. Severity is medium as it impacts data reliability.

  • Impact:

    • Logical Errors in Timezone Calculations: Medium to High Risk Reduction. Thorough timezone testing with Carbon significantly reduces the risk of undetected logical errors related to timezone handling in production.
    • Data Integrity Issues due to Timezone Errors: Medium Risk Reduction. Testing helps ensure data integrity by validating correct timezone handling within Carbon's operations.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Timezone Testing: Basic unit and integration tests exist, but dedicated and comprehensive timezone-specific testing of Carbon is limited.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Dedicated Carbon Timezone Test Suite: Lack of a dedicated test suite specifically focused on testing Carbon's timezone handling across diverse scenarios.
    • Automated Carbon Timezone Tests: Timezone tests are not fully automated and integrated into the CI/CD pipeline for consistent execution.