Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
116 lines (102 loc) · 8.15 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

116 lines (102 loc) · 8.15 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for encode/django-rest-framework

Objective: Unauthorized Access to Data/Functionality via DRF

Attack Tree Visualization

[Attacker's Goal: Unauthorized Access to Data/Functionality via DRF] | |---> [1. Authentication Bypass/Weakness] | |---> [1.2 Token Leakage] | |---> [1.2.1 Exposure in Logs/Responses] [*** Critical Node ] | |---> [2. Authorization Bypass/Misconfiguration] | |---> [2.1 Incorrect Permission Classes] [ Critical Node ] | |---> [3. DRF-Specific Vulnerabilities] | |---> [3.1 Version-Specific Vulnerabilities] | |---> [3.1.1 Known CVEs in older DRF versions] [ Critical Node ] | |---> [3.2 Serializer Vulnerabilities] | |---> [3.2.1 Deserialization of Untrusted Data] [ Critical Node ] | |---> [5. API Misconfiguration (DRF-Specific)] |---> [5.1 Debug Mode Enabled in Prod] [ Critical Node ***]

Attack Tree Path: 1.2.1 Exposure in Logs/Responses (Token Leakage)

  • Description: Authentication tokens (JWT, OAuth tokens, etc.) are accidentally included in log files or API responses (e.g., error messages, debug output).
    • How it works:
      • Developers might inadvertently log the request.headers or the entire request object, which includes the Authorization header containing the token.
      • Error handling might not properly sanitize responses, revealing tokens in error messages.
      • Debug output might include sensitive information.
    • Likelihood: Medium (Common mistake)
    • Impact: High (Full account takeover)
    • Effort: Very Low (Just needs to see the logs/response)
    • Skill Level: Script Kiddie
    • Detection Difficulty: Easy (If logs are monitored)
    • Mitigation:
      • Never log sensitive data: Explicitly exclude tokens from logging. Use logging filters to redact sensitive information.
      • Sanitize error responses: Ensure error messages do not reveal internal details or tokens.
      • Use HTTPS everywhere: This prevents eavesdropping on network traffic, but doesn't protect against logging on the server.
      • Review code for logging practices: Conduct code reviews to identify and fix any instances of logging sensitive data.

Attack Tree Path: 2.1 Incorrect Permission Classes

  • Description: DRF views are configured with overly permissive permission classes (e.g., AllowAny), or permission classes are missing entirely, allowing unauthorized access to API endpoints.
    • How it works:
      • Developers might forget to apply permission classes to views.
      • They might use AllowAny for testing and forget to change it before deployment.
      • They might misunderstand how permission classes work and use an incorrect one.
      • The DEFAULT_PERMISSION_CLASSES setting in settings.py might be too permissive.
    • Likelihood: Medium (Common misconfiguration)
    • Impact: Medium to High (Depends on the data/functionality exposed)
    • Effort: Low
    • Skill Level: Beginner
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Requires reviewing code and API behavior)
    • Mitigation:
      • Principle of Least Privilege: Apply the most restrictive permission class that allows the necessary functionality.
      • Use appropriate permission classes: IsAuthenticated, IsAdminUser, custom permission classes.
      • Set DEFAULT_PERMISSION_CLASSES: Configure a restrictive default in your settings.
      • Test API endpoints: Thoroughly test each endpoint with different user roles and authentication states to ensure permissions are enforced correctly.
      • Code Reviews: Review code to ensure permission classes are applied correctly.

Attack Tree Path: 3.1.1 Known CVEs in older DRF versions

  • Description: Older, unpatched versions of Django REST Framework contain known vulnerabilities (documented in CVEs) that attackers can exploit.
    • How it works:
      • Attackers scan for applications using vulnerable versions of DRF.
      • They use publicly available exploit code or develop their own exploits based on the CVE details.
      • They target the specific vulnerability to gain unauthorized access.
    • Likelihood: High (If DRF is not updated)
    • Impact: Varies (Depends on the CVE, could be anything from Low to Very High)
    • Effort: Very Low (Exploits are often publicly available)
    • Skill Level: Script Kiddie to Intermediate
    • Detection Difficulty: Easy (Vulnerability scanners can detect this)
    • Mitigation:
      • Keep DRF up-to-date: This is the most crucial mitigation. Regularly check for security updates and apply them promptly.
      • Use a dependency management tool: (e.g., pip, poetry) to track and update DRF.
      • Subscribe to security advisories: Stay informed about new vulnerabilities.
      • Use a vulnerability scanner: Regularly scan your application for known vulnerabilities.

Attack Tree Path: 3.2.1 Deserialization of Untrusted Data

  • Description: DRF serializers deserialize data from untrusted sources (e.g., user input) without proper validation, leading to potential injection attacks or other exploits.
    • How it works:
      • Attackers craft malicious payloads that exploit weaknesses in the deserialization process.
      • This can occur with custom fields, nested serializers, or when using unsafe serialization formats (like pickle).
      • The attacker might be able to inject arbitrary code or manipulate data.
    • Likelihood: Medium (If input validation is weak)
    • Impact: High to Very High (Potential for RCE or data corruption)
    • Effort: Medium to High (Requires crafting a malicious payload)
    • Skill Level: Intermediate to Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard (Requires analyzing input and serializer behavior)
    • Mitigation:
      • Validate all input: Use DRF's built-in validation mechanisms (e.g., validate_<field_name> methods, validators).
      • Be cautious with custom fields: Thoroughly validate data handled by custom fields.
      • Avoid unsafe serialization formats: Do not use pickle or other formats that can execute arbitrary code.
      • Use a whitelist approach: Only allow specific fields and data types.
      • Sanitize input: Remove or escape potentially dangerous characters.
      • Consider using a safer serialization format: JSON is generally safer than formats like YAML or pickle.

Attack Tree Path: 5.1 Debug Mode Enabled in Prod

  • Description: DRF's debug mode is accidentally left enabled in a production environment, exposing sensitive information like database queries, source code snippets, and internal settings.
    • How it works:
      • The DEBUG setting in settings.py is set to True.
      • DRF's error pages and debug toolbar reveal sensitive information to anyone who accesses the API.
    • Likelihood: Low (Should be caught in deployment, but happens)
    • Impact: Very High (Exposes a lot of sensitive information)
    • Effort: Very Low (Just needs to access the API)
    • Skill Level: Script Kiddie
    • Detection Difficulty: Very Easy (Obvious in responses)
    • Mitigation:
      • Set DEBUG = False in production: This is the only mitigation. Ensure your deployment process sets this correctly.
      • Use environment variables: Store sensitive settings like DEBUG in environment variables, not in the code.
      • Automated deployment checks: Include checks in your deployment pipeline to ensure DEBUG is False.