Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
48 lines (39 loc) · 5.1 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

48 lines (39 loc) · 5.1 KB

Threat Model Analysis for dmlc/dgl

Threat: Malicious Graph Data Injection

  • Description: An attacker provides crafted graph data containing malicious structures or properties. DGL processes this data, potentially triggering vulnerabilities or causing unexpected behavior leading to Remote Code Execution (RCE) if DGL's graph parsing has vulnerabilities.
  • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE), application crashes, unexpected model behavior.
  • DGL Component Affected: Graph Input/Parsing modules, potentially core graph data structures.
  • Risk Severity: High (potential for RCE).
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Validate and sanitize all graph data from untrusted sources before loading into DGL.
    • Implement input validation to rigorously check graph size, node/edge features, and structural integrity.
    • Use schema validation for graph data if applicable to enforce expected graph structure.
    • Consider sandboxing graph processing if dealing with highly untrusted input to limit potential damage from exploits.

Threat: Graph Deserialization Vulnerabilities

  • Description: An attacker provides a maliciously crafted serialized graph file. When the application uses DGL to deserialize this file using functions like dgl.load_graphs, a vulnerability in DGL's deserialization code is exploited, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution on the server.
  • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE), Denial of Service (DoS), data corruption, privilege escalation.
  • DGL Component Affected: dgl.save_graphs, dgl.load_graphs functions, graph serialization/deserialization modules.
  • Risk Severity: Critical (potential for RCE).
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Crucially, only deserialize graphs from trusted and authenticated sources. Never deserialize graphs from untrusted or public sources.
    • Keep DGL library updated to the latest version to benefit from security patches that may address deserialization vulnerabilities.
    • If possible, explore alternative secure serialization methods, although DGL's built-in methods are often necessary for its graph objects.

Threat: Vulnerabilities in DGL Core Library

  • Description: DGL, being a complex software library, may contain undiscovered bugs or vulnerabilities in its core C++ or Python codebase. An attacker could exploit these vulnerabilities if they are discovered, potentially leading to Remote Code Execution or other severe impacts.
  • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE), Denial of Service (DoS), information disclosure, privilege escalation, depending on the nature of the vulnerability.
  • DGL Component Affected: Various core modules of DGL, including C++ backend and Python API.
  • Risk Severity: Critical to High (depending on the vulnerability type, RCE being critical).
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Mandatory: Keep DGL library updated to the latest stable version to receive critical security patches.
    • Monitor DGL's (and general ML/scientific computing libraries) security advisories and vulnerability databases, although DGL specific advisories might be less frequent.
    • Follow secure coding practices when using DGL APIs and functionalities to minimize the chance of triggering underlying bugs or unexpected behavior.

Threat: Insecure Custom Function Handling in DGL

  • Description: If the application allows users to provide or influence custom functions used within DGL (e.g., for message passing, user-defined functions in apply_nodes, apply_edges, etc.), an attacker could inject malicious code through these custom functions. DGL would then execute this attacker-controlled code with the application's privileges, leading to severe security breaches.
  • Impact: Remote Code Execution (RCE), privilege escalation, data breaches, complete system compromise.
  • DGL Component Affected: User-defined function integration points in DGL, message passing APIs, custom operators, apply_nodes, apply_edges, update_all and related functions.
  • Risk Severity: Critical (direct RCE potential).
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Strongly Recommended: Avoid allowing users to directly provide or influence custom DGL functions if at all possible. Design the application to avoid this requirement.
    • If custom functions are absolutely necessary from untrusted sources, implement extremely strict input validation and sanitization. This is highly complex and error-prone for code, and generally discouraged.
    • Use robust sandboxing or containerization to isolate DGL execution and severely limit the impact of potential code injection vulnerabilities within custom functions. This is a complex mitigation and requires careful implementation.
    • Perform rigorous code review and security testing, including penetration testing, of any application components that handle or execute custom functions within DGL before deployment.