Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
62 lines (48 loc) · 4.76 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

62 lines (48 loc) · 4.76 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for davidsandberg/facenet

Objective: To bypass or manipulate the facial recognition system implemented using davidsandberg/facenet to gain unauthorized access to resources or impersonate legitimate users.

Attack Tree Visualization

                                 Compromise Facenet-Based Application [CN]
                                                |
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    |													   |
  1. Input Manipulation (Evasion) [HR] 3. Implementation/Configuration Weaknesses | | ------|---------- ------|---------- | | 2.1 [CN] [HR] 3.2 [CN] [HR] Adversarial Examples Weak Distance Threshold

Attack Tree Path: Compromise Facenet-Based Application [CN]

  • Description: This is the root node, representing the ultimate objective of the attacker. It encompasses all successful attacks that lead to unauthorized access or impersonation.
  • Likelihood: Dependent on the success of child nodes.
  • Impact: Very High - Complete compromise of the system's security.
  • Effort: Variable, depends on the chosen attack path.
  • Skill Level: Variable, depends on the chosen attack path.
  • Detection Difficulty: Variable, depends on the chosen attack path and implemented security measures.

Attack Tree Path: 2. Input Manipulation (Evasion) [HR]

  • Description: This branch represents attacks that focus on manipulating the input to the Facenet model to cause misclassification or bypass security checks. It's a high-risk area due to the relative ease of crafting such attacks and their potential effectiveness.
  • Likelihood: High - This is a common attack vector against facial recognition systems.
  • Impact: Medium to High - Can lead to unauthorized access or impersonation.
  • Effort: Generally Low to Medium - Tools and techniques are readily available.
  • Skill Level: Intermediate - Requires some understanding of machine learning and facial recognition.
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium - Requires specific defenses like adversarial training or liveness detection.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1 Adversarial Examples [CN] [HR]

  • Description: The attacker crafts subtle, often imperceptible, perturbations to an input image. These perturbations are designed to cause the Facenet model to misclassify the image, allowing the attacker to be recognized as a legitimate user or to avoid detection altogether.
  • Likelihood: High - Publicly available tools and techniques make generating adversarial examples relatively easy.
  • Impact: Medium to High - Can allow an attacker to bypass facial recognition.
  • Effort: Low - Automated tools significantly reduce the effort required.
  • Skill Level: Intermediate - Requires understanding of adversarial example generation techniques.
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium - Can be detected through adversarial training, input preprocessing, or specialized detection methods, but it's an ongoing arms race.

Attack Tree Path: 3. Implementation/Configuration Weaknesses

  • Description: This branch represents vulnerabilities that arise from how Facenet is integrated into the application.
  • Likelihood: High
  • Impact: Medium to High
  • Effort: Low
  • Skill Level: Novice to Intermediate
  • Detection Difficulty: Easy to Medium

Attack Tree Path: 3.2 Weak Distance Threshold [CN] [HR]

  • Description: The application uses a distance threshold that is too lenient when comparing face embeddings. This makes it easier for an attacker to impersonate a legitimate user, as even a somewhat similar face might be accepted by the system. This is a configuration flaw, not an active attack by itself.
  • Likelihood: High - This is a common misconfiguration due to a lack of understanding of the security implications or inadequate testing.
  • Impact: Medium to High - Significantly increases the false acceptance rate, making impersonation easier.
  • Effort: Very Low (for the attacker) - The vulnerability is already present; no active effort is required to create it. Exploitation is trivial.
  • Skill Level: Novice (for the attacker) - No specific attacker skill is required to exploit an existing weak threshold.
  • Detection Difficulty: Easy - Easily detected through testing and FAR/FRR analysis. The vulnerability is in the configuration, not in a hidden attack.