Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
37 lines (30 loc) · 6.06 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

37 lines (30 loc) · 6.06 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for slimphp/slim

Attack Surface: Debug Mode Information Disclosure

  • Description: Exposing sensitive application information like error details and stack traces to unauthorized users in production due to debug mode being enabled.
  • Slim Contribution: Slim provides a debug configuration setting. When enabled, Slim's error handling displays verbose error pages. Leaving this enabled in production directly exposes sensitive information due to Slim's design.
  • Example: A production application configured with debug set to true. An attacker triggers an error. Slim's error handler displays a detailed error page, including file paths, code snippets, and potentially database connection details from stack traces, directly because Slim is configured to do so in debug mode.
  • Impact: Information leakage, revealing internal application workings, facilitating further attacks, potential exposure of sensitive credentials.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Disable Debug Mode in Production: Set the debug configuration option in your Slim application to false for production environments. This is the primary and most critical mitigation.
    • Environment-Specific Configuration: Utilize environment variables or separate configuration files to ensure debug mode is automatically disabled when deploying to production.

Attack Surface: Middleware Misconfiguration and Bypass

  • Description: Incorrect configuration or implementation of Slim's middleware pipeline leading to security middleware being bypassed, allowing unauthorized access or actions.
  • Slim Contribution: Slim's core architecture relies on a middleware pipeline for request processing. Misconfiguration in how middleware is added or ordered within Slim directly leads to potential bypasses of intended security measures implemented as middleware. Slim's structure enables this risk if middleware is not carefully managed.
  • Example: Authentication middleware and authorization middleware are added to a Slim application. Due to incorrect ordering in add() calls or conditional logic within the application setup, the authorization middleware executes before the authentication middleware, or a specific route is accidentally configured to skip the authentication middleware entirely. This is a direct consequence of how middleware is registered and applied within Slim.
  • Impact: Authentication bypass, authorization bypass, input validation bypass, allowing unauthorized access to application resources and functionalities.
  • Risk Severity: Critical (depending on the bypassed middleware and protected resources)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Thorough Middleware Configuration Review: Carefully review the order in which middleware is added to the Slim application. Ensure security-critical middleware (authentication, authorization, input validation) is correctly placed and applied to all relevant routes.
    • Explicit Route-Specific Middleware (When Necessary): If certain routes require different middleware stacks, explicitly define and apply middleware groups or route-specific middleware to avoid accidental bypasses due to global middleware application.
    • Integration Testing of Middleware Pipeline: Implement integration tests that specifically verify the correct execution and order of middleware for various routes and request scenarios to detect misconfigurations early.

Attack Surface: Route Parameter Handling and Injection Vulnerabilities (Enabled by Routing)

  • Description: Improper handling of route parameters within application code, leading to injection vulnerabilities when parameters are directly used in sensitive operations without validation. While the vulnerability is in application code, Slim's routing mechanism directly enables this attack surface if developers are not careful.
  • Slim Contribution: Slim's routing system allows defining routes with dynamic parameters (e.g., /users/{id}). Slim provides mechanisms to easily extract these parameters within route handlers. This ease of access, without built-in sanitization, directly contributes to the attack surface if developers directly use these parameters in database queries or other sensitive operations without proper validation. Slim's routing makes parameter extraction straightforward, which can be misused if security is not prioritized in application code.
  • Example: A Slim route defined as /items/{item_id}. The route handler directly uses $request->getAttribute('item_id') in a database query like SELECT * FROM items WHERE id = $item_id. An attacker can manipulate item_id to inject SQL code, directly exploiting the way Slim makes route parameters accessible and the application's direct use of them.
  • Impact: Data breach, data manipulation, unauthorized access, potential system compromise (especially with SQL Injection).
  • Risk Severity: Critical (for SQL Injection)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Input Validation and Sanitization (Crucial for Route Parameters): Implement robust input validation and sanitization specifically for all route parameters extracted from the Slim request object. Treat route parameters as untrusted user input.
    • Parameterized Queries/ORMs (Essential for Database Interactions): Always use parameterized queries or ORMs when interacting with databases and using route parameters in queries. This prevents SQL Injection by separating SQL code from user-provided data.
    • Principle of Least Privilege (File System/System Operations): If route parameters are used for file system or system operations, strictly validate and sanitize them to prevent Path Traversal or Command Injection vulnerabilities. Avoid directly constructing file paths or system commands using route parameters without thorough validation.