Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
136 lines (119 loc) · 9.34 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

136 lines (119 loc) · 9.34 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for roots/sage

Objective: Gain Unauthorized Access to WordPress Admin or Execute Arbitrary Code

Attack Tree Visualization

Goal: Gain Unauthorized Access to WordPress Admin or Execute Arbitrary Code

├── 1. Exploit Sage-Specific Theme Configuration Issues │ ├── 1.1. Insecure Asset Handling (Webpack/Bud) <-- HIGH-RISK PATH START │ │ ├── 1.1.1. Source Map Exposure │ │ │ ├── 1.1.1.1. Access Source Code (JS, SCSS) │ │ │ │ └── 1.1.1.1.1. Identify Vulnerabilities in Custom Code │ │ │ │ - Likelihood: Medium │ │ │ │ - Impact: Medium │ │ │ │ - Effort: Very Low │ │ │ │ - Skill Level: Beginner │ │ │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Easy │ │ │ └── 1.1.1.2. Leak Sensitive Information (API Keys, etc., if mistakenly included) <-- CRITICAL NODE │ │ │ - Likelihood: Low │ │ │ - Impact: High │ │ │ - Effort: Very Low │ │ │ - Skill Level: Beginner │ │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Hard │ │ └── 1.1.2. Unintended File Inclusion via mix() or asset() │ │ └── 1.1.2.2. Potential for Directory Traversal (if combined with other vulnerabilities) <-- CRITICAL NODE │ │ - Likelihood: Very Low │ │ - Impact: Very High │ │ - Effort: High │ │ - Skill Level: Advanced │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Hard │ ├── 1.2. Theme Logic Vulnerabilities (Blade Templates) │ │ ├── 1.2.1. Unsanitized User Input in Blade Templates <-- HIGH-RISK PATH START │ │ │ └── 1.2.1.1. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) <-- HIGH-RISK PATH CONTINUES │ │ │ - Likelihood: Medium │ │ │ - Impact: Medium to High │ │ │ - Effort: Low │ │ │ - Skill Level: Intermediate │ │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Medium │ │ └── 1.2.3. Insecure Use of eval() or Similar Functions (Highly Unlikely, but worth noting) │ │ └── 1.2.3.1. Arbitrary Code Execution <-- CRITICAL NODE │ │ - Likelihood: Very Low │ │ - Impact: Very High │ │ - Effort: Low │ │ - Skill Level: Intermediate │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Medium │ └── 1.3. Improper use of Sage's Acorn framework │ └── 1.3.2 Incorrectly implemented custom commands │ └── 1.3.2.1 Allow execution of arbitrary commands on the server (if accessible) <-- CRITICAL NODE │ - Likelihood: Very Low │ - Impact: Very High │ - Effort: Medium │ - Skill Level: Advanced │ - Detection Difficulty: Hard ├── 2. Exploit Dependencies Introduced by Sage <-- HIGH-RISK PATH START (General) │ ├── 2.1. Vulnerabilities in Bud (Webpack Wrapper) │ │ └── 2.1.1. Exploit Known Bud Vulnerabilities (CVEs) │ │ - Likelihood: Low to Medium │ │ - Effort: Low to Medium │ │ - Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Medium │ ├── 2.2. Vulnerabilities in Acorn │ │ └── 2.2.1. Exploit Known Acorn Vulnerabilities (CVEs) │ │ - Likelihood: Low to Medium │ │ - Impact: Medium to High │ │ - Effort: Low to Medium │ │ - Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced │ │ - Detection Difficulty: Medium │ └── 2.3. Vulnerabilities in other Node.js or PHP Packages <-- HIGH-RISK PATH CONTINUES (General) │ └── 2.3.1. Exploit Known Vulnerabilities in Dependencies (CVEs) <-- CRITICAL NODE (If RCE) │ - Likelihood: Low to Medium │ - Impact: Medium to Very High │ - Effort: Low to Medium │ - Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced │ - Detection Difficulty: Medium

Attack Tree Path: High-Risk Path 1: Source Map Exposure

  1. 1.1.1 Source Map Exposure:
    • Description: The attacker accesses the website and checks for the presence of source maps (e.g., .js.map files) in the browser's developer tools or by directly requesting them.
    • 1.1.1.1 Access Source Code (JS, SCSS): If source maps are found, the attacker downloads them.
      • 1.1.1.1.1 Identify Vulnerabilities in Custom Code: The attacker analyzes the decompiled source code (JavaScript, SCSS) to identify potential vulnerabilities in the theme's custom logic. This could include insecure coding practices, logic flaws, or exposed sensitive data.
    • 1.1.1.2 Leak Sensitive Information (API Keys, etc., if mistakenly included) (CRITICAL NODE):
      • Description: The attacker examines the source maps for accidentally included sensitive information, such as API keys, database credentials, or other secrets. This is a direct compromise if successful.

Attack Tree Path: High-Risk Path 2: Unsanitized User Input -> XSS

  1. 1.2.1 Unsanitized User Input in Blade Templates:
    • Description: The attacker identifies areas of the website where user input is displayed without proper sanitization or escaping within Blade templates. This could be in forms, comments, search results, or any other area where user-generated content is rendered.
    • 1.2.1.1 Cross-Site Scripting (XSS):
      • Description: The attacker crafts malicious JavaScript code and injects it into the vulnerable input field. When other users visit the affected page, the injected script executes in their browsers. This can lead to cookie theft, session hijacking, website defacement, or redirection to malicious websites.

Attack Tree Path: High-Risk Path 3 (General): Dependency Vulnerabilities

  1. 2.1 Vulnerabilities in Bud (Webpack Wrapper) / 2.2 Vulnerabilities in Acorn / 2.3 Vulnerabilities in other Node.js or PHP Packages:
    • Description: The attacker researches known vulnerabilities (CVEs) in the specific versions of Bud, Acorn, or other Node.js/PHP packages used by the Sage theme.
    • 2.1.1/2.2.1/2.3.1 Exploit Known Vulnerabilities in Dependencies (CVEs) (CRITICAL NODE if RCE):
      • Description: The attacker finds a publicly available exploit for a known vulnerability and attempts to use it against the website. The impact depends on the specific vulnerability, but if it allows Remote Code Execution (RCE), it's a critical node leading to full server compromise.

Attack Tree Path: Critical Nodes (Detailed Breakdown):

  • 1.1.1.2 Leak Sensitive Information (via Source Maps):

    • Likelihood: Low (Requires developer error to include secrets in source code)
    • Impact: High (Direct access to sensitive data, potentially leading to further compromise)
    • Effort: Very Low (If secrets are present, they are easily accessible)
    • Skill Level: Beginner
    • Detection Difficulty: Hard (Requires proactive monitoring for specific data patterns)

  • 1.1.2.2 Potential for Directory Traversal:

    • Likelihood: Very Low (Requires a combination of misconfiguration and other vulnerabilities)
    • Impact: Very High (Potential for full server compromise by accessing arbitrary files)
    • Effort: High (Requires crafting specific URLs and exploiting complex interactions)
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Hard (May appear as normal traffic initially, requires careful log analysis)

  • 1.2.3.1 Arbitrary Code Execution (via eval()):

    • Likelihood: Very Low (Extremely bad practice and unlikely in a well-maintained theme)
    • Impact: Very High (Full server compromise)
    • Effort: Low (If eval() is present and vulnerable, exploitation is straightforward)
    • Skill Level: Intermediate (Crafting the malicious input)
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Code analysis can reveal the presence of eval(), but exploitation might not be immediately obvious)

  • 1.3.2.1 Allow execution of arbitrary commands on the server (via custom Acorn commands): * Likelihood: Very Low (Requires significant developer error and lack of security) * Impact: Very High (Full server compromise) * Effort: Medium (Crafting the command, gaining access) * Skill Level: Advanced * Detection Difficulty: Hard (May appear as legitimate server activity)

  • 2.3.1 Exploit Known Vulnerabilities in Dependencies (if RCE):

    • Likelihood: Low to Medium (Depends on the specific dependency, its version, and patching frequency)
    • Impact: Very High (If the vulnerability allows Remote Code Execution, it leads to full server compromise)
    • Effort: Low to Medium (Often, publicly available exploits exist)
    • Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced (Understanding and adapting exploits)
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Intrusion Detection Systems and vulnerability scanners can often detect known exploits)